Both good points. If I may ask, why is MS dropping the case if they had good points to make something come of it?
It wouldn't be the first time someone who thought they might lose backed down to avoid setting a precedent. Police departments did it with cases where people challenged the use of Stingrays, for example.
I.E. This seems a lawfare move to step back general gag use, so that they can step forward again in specific gag use, rather than risk losing and finding future gags severely restricted. Microsoft is being polite because sometimes it might be reasonable for government to gag a subpoena, without it being a national security issue.