You can basically sum that up as "we weren't able to protect your privacy in the first place, so you don't have to worry about this bill compromising it".
The quote also misses that Australia has silent and warrantless access to data and that Fastmail's servers are in the US, so subject to America's three-letter agencies as well.
> I'm just some boob on the internet that doesn't speak legalese but a quick Google suggests that Gmail [0] and Outlook [1] are subject to similar laws.
The competition isn't American megacorps, it's small European companies like ProtonMail (Switzerland, as far as I can see usually requires a court order and Swiss law requires notifying the subject) or Mailbox.org (Germany, only allows disclosure with a warrant or imminent danger to life). Even if your email is left unencrypted, these countries have much stronger data protection and privacy laws.
That's one beautiful quote
> Fastmail won’t be making changes to our technology or policies in response to this bill. Law enforcement has always been able to request information from us through the Telecommunications Act with a lawful warrant. Because we have the ability to decrypt all data, there is no need to make changes that circumvent encryption.
Source: https://fastmail.blog/2018/12/21/advocating-for-privacy-aabi...
I'm just some boob on the internet that doesn't speak legalese but a quick Google suggests that Gmail [0] and Outlook [1] are subject to similar laws.
[0] https://support.google.com/transparencyreport/answer/7381738...
[1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/law...