It doesn't matter what you agree to. If a clause is unenforceable by law, it's unenforceable full stop.
As an extreme example, if the MSFT agreement states that by using OneDrive I agree to them being able to take my children away from to to use as domestic servants, and I use OneDrive, the agreement is clearly ludicrous and MSFT wouldn't be able to enact it.
Nothing in the MSFT agreement supercedes local laws.
Thanks for pointing out in a way hopefully everybody understands now - FINALLY someone got it right. Indeed maybe the point of the article above got lost for some ppl due to translation as its
not about the
usual "Microsoft it's scanning my files! Eeek!" paranoia. And probably the lack of knowledge about other countries laws, like in this case europe where privacy still has some value - which is not surprising since there was a country where privacy was the exception and monitoring and surveillance daily routine. Ask those people who suffered under that regime for decades until 1989.
As being said in the article, giving out any kind of information based upon their own decision to third without a valid adjudication first is the questionable / unlawful act. And as we all know any evidence gained by the use of unlawful methods is usually not accepted by the court. So theres a chance this guy gets away with less than what he really deserves - and that is what none of us wants, right? Also MS will likely have to deal with charges as well for what they did besides the mistrust from users and some privacy groups already giving a statement about this.