>Perhaps the banning of US Cloud companies will spur the growth of Non-US cloud companies which fall only under national jurisdiction.
This. Why the hell not, after all? You could pretty much build the infrastructure in your sleep if you're any kind of Regtard worth your salt, and it's a hot topic right now so what better time? I'm actually a bit surprised I've not seen firms advertising "sovereignty guaranteed" cloud hosting on the back of all this.
This sort of thing is exactly why I've always gone with hosts that have only UK datacentres: were it not this exact thing, it would have been some other jurisdictional brouhaha to extricate m'clients from. There was bound to be one eventually, so I've always seen it as saving future headaches.
[That said, back when I arrived at that policy I didn't anticipate quite how questionable our *own* data governance would become wrt rule of law and so forth; but I'd still rather it be a UK court I go to the mat in, if I ever have to. Sweden seems a bit hit-and-miss depending who/how influential the plaintiff is.]
Biting the hand that feeds IT
