That seems to be an unrealistic expectation. General anonymity is not something you can just buy. It only lasts for a limited time and takes considerable work on the part of the user. It was obvious to me when I encountered the claim in question that it was about preventing the commercial exploitation of personal data and not some fundamental discovery that changed the normal exceptions of what was achievable in terms of anonymity.
As proof of concept it shows that there may be a viable commercial privacy-centric communication mechanism which works by not letting the service providers know their clients IPs.
Go to court as a host, let the prosecutor present "proofs" that this person deserves to be prosecuted under international law, which they don't have because this is a clear case of political repression. Let the judge laugh at the ridicule of the case, or worst case scenario comply with the judge's order, which would hopefully give enough time to the targeted person to know they're a target by now and stop using Protonmail altogether (or do it via tor).
That's what a responsible host does. I don't have the same standard for smaller, non-profit hosts. But for a big organization with vast sums of money like Protonmail i would expect no less.
What's next, cooperating with chinese political police?
They have stated that there was not a legal possiblity to challenge in this case after the Swiss DOJ made their determination.
You suggest "go to court" but there was apparently not a means to do so. Judges aren't private arbiters and don't hear random cases at the request of companies
Your solution to a lawful request is covert backchanneling to the police of a foreign nation?
Im not trying to say that what happened isn’t so bad , I just don’t see how with today international justice cooperation someone could truly expect « privacy ».
Wether this is a from a service provider or directly from your ISP, it’s not possible to get privacy unless your rely on private peer to peer network.