WhatsApp vs. NSO Case: The Dispute Over a Letter Rogatory and the Legal Battle Surrounding Pegasus
The legal dispute between both companies continues to escalate, with both sides entrenching themselves in their positions
Ami Rojkes Dombe
| 24/06/2024
Photo: Lukas – Pexels.com
During ongoing legal proceedings, WhatsApp and others filed a lawsuit against NSO Group and others, alleging the illegal use of the "Pegasus" spyware for monitoring users. Recently, a significant dispute arose surrounding NSO's request for a letter rogatory to Citizen Lab, a research center specializing in information security and surveillance.
A letter rogatory is a formal request from a court in one country to a court in another country, seeking legal assistance for an investigation or legal proceedings. In this case, NSO is requesting to obtain information from Citizen Lab, located in another country, about individuals listed in their records.
NSO claims that many of the individuals listed in Citizen Lab's "Civil Society" and "VIP" lists are legitimate targets for law enforcement or intelligence activities. According to NSO, these individuals are involved in criminal or terrorist activities. The court has allowed NSO to renew the request for a letter rogatory, provided they supply concrete evidence of the individual's involvement in criminal or terrorist activities.
Accordingly, NSO provided WhatsApp with evidence that it claims indicates the involvement of several individuals on the lists in criminal or terrorist activities. The company argues that this information justifies the request for a letter rogatory to obtain additional information from Citizen Lab.
WhatsApp, on its part, argues that NSO has failed to provide concrete evidence indicating the involvement of the individuals in criminal or terrorist activities. According to WhatsApp, the information that NSO provided is based on unreliable internet sources and not on concrete evidence. Furthermore, WhatsApp claims that NSO has not demonstrated that its activities were legal under U.S. law, which is necessary to claim a defense under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Citizen Lab vehemently opposes NSO's request to renew the letter rogatory. The organization argues that the information provided by NSO does not justify the request and that NSO's actions were not legal under U.S. law. Furthermore, Citizen Lab emphasizes that the request for the letter rogatory is unnecessary since NSO has failed to provide concrete evidence of the individuals’ involvement in criminal or terrorist activities.
In conclusion: The legal dispute between WhatsApp and NSO continues to intensify, with both sides steadfast in their positions. NSO is requesting the court to renew the letter rogatory in order to obtain additional information from Citizen Lab, while WhatsApp and Citizen Lab vehemently oppose this request. This case places at its center the legal question of whether clandestine surveillance of certain suspects can be justified using spyware such as Pegasus, and to what extent law enforcement and intelligence claims can be relied upon in this context.
The legal dispute between both companies continues to escalate, with both sides entrenching themselves in their positions
Photo: Lukas – Pexels.com
During ongoing legal proceedings, WhatsApp and others filed a lawsuit against NSO Group and others, alleging the illegal use of the "Pegasus" spyware for monitoring users. Recently, a significant dispute arose surrounding NSO's request for a letter rogatory to Citizen Lab, a research center specializing in information security and surveillance.
A letter rogatory is a formal request from a court in one country to a court in another country, seeking legal assistance for an investigation or legal proceedings. In this case, NSO is requesting to obtain information from Citizen Lab, located in another country, about individuals listed in their records.
NSO claims that many of the individuals listed in Citizen Lab's "Civil Society" and "VIP" lists are legitimate targets for law enforcement or intelligence activities. According to NSO, these individuals are involved in criminal or terrorist activities. The court has allowed NSO to renew the request for a letter rogatory, provided they supply concrete evidence of the individual's involvement in criminal or terrorist activities.
Accordingly, NSO provided WhatsApp with evidence that it claims indicates the involvement of several individuals on the lists in criminal or terrorist activities. The company argues that this information justifies the request for a letter rogatory to obtain additional information from Citizen Lab.
WhatsApp, on its part, argues that NSO has failed to provide concrete evidence indicating the involvement of the individuals in criminal or terrorist activities. According to WhatsApp, the information that NSO provided is based on unreliable internet sources and not on concrete evidence. Furthermore, WhatsApp claims that NSO has not demonstrated that its activities were legal under U.S. law, which is necessary to claim a defense under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Citizen Lab vehemently opposes NSO's request to renew the letter rogatory. The organization argues that the information provided by NSO does not justify the request and that NSO's actions were not legal under U.S. law. Furthermore, Citizen Lab emphasizes that the request for the letter rogatory is unnecessary since NSO has failed to provide concrete evidence of the individuals’ involvement in criminal or terrorist activities.
In conclusion: The legal dispute between WhatsApp and NSO continues to intensify, with both sides steadfast in their positions. NSO is requesting the court to renew the letter rogatory in order to obtain additional information from Citizen Lab, while WhatsApp and Citizen Lab vehemently oppose this request. This case places at its center the legal question of whether clandestine surveillance of certain suspects can be justified using spyware such as Pegasus, and to what extent law enforcement and intelligence claims can be relied upon in this context.
