content: And the secretary of state shouldn't be storing confidential emails on her home server, but sometimes, believe it or not, the older generations have literally no understanding of how technology works. A patient might keep track of his medical records in an online document that Microsoft says is "safe and secure". A reasonable person might assume that a safe and secure platform provided by Microsoft wouldn't be mining his private information. The entire concept of a jury is to decide what a group of people see as reasonable. If someone's medical information was obtained from Microsoft for money, let's say an insurance company so they know who not to cover (the entire reason HIPAA was created) then the question to ask is whether a jury would agree that a reasonable person isn't going to read through a thousand page micro print boilerplate contract before using a service that claims to be safe and secure. You should look up boilerplate contracts and the law around them as well. Contracts aren't ironclad excuses to do whatever you want without impunity. You can't write contracts that remove peoples rights.