Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Violates Human Rights in China
gexen writes "According to this article in The Guardian, 'Amnesty believes Microsoft is in violation of a new United Nations Human Rights code for multinationals which says businesses should 'seek to ensure that the goods and services they provide will not be used to abuse human rights'. The article basically states that 'Gate's firm supplied technology used to trap Chinese dissidents'."
This isn't really a surprise... this basically says that Microsoft is guilty because people use their software to violate human rights..
How MS is responsible for that, I can't figure out...
Prosecute the criminals, not those who make a product and have that product abused by criminals..
It's hard to see how Microsoft can win. If they make software that can be used to censor internet access and sell it to China, then they're aiding in human rights violations. If they make it and don't sell it to China, then they get accused of discrimination. If their software can't censor internet access, then the majority of public schools and libraries can't use it.
That depends on if MS provided technology *specifically* for the purpose of trapping dissidents... if that were the case then MS would indeed have been a direct party to the violation of human rights in China.
I mean come on. Yes yes, evil monopoly out to make money and their products are being used by people to violate human rights. Well, given China's iffy record on copyright enforcement, are is anyone even sure MS got paid for those products?
MS may have a lot of problems, but I don't know how they are supposed to know a priori that certain software they sell is going to be used for human rights violations. And frankly, I think the software would be pirated even if they refused to sell it.
Ridiculous bid for attention? What? All AI reports read like this. They cricize human rights violations no matter who it is or the situation. Their job as they've set it out for themselves is to defend human rights and this article is a fair criticism of US companies (Nortel and Cisco are also mentioned but slashdot was good enough to not mention them) that make a good deal of money building censor networks in other countries.
How would you feel if they were building those networks of censorship here?
I think the problem with all these large companies is their choice to hide behind the almighty buck. Capitalism reigns supreme. `Hey, what is it any of my business if you use my product to harm or kill people? Just as long as you pay up.'
I'm not implying that companies are responsible for finding out every last detail of how their product will be used when they sell it to a customer. However, I do think that turning a blind-eye to how their product will be used when it's fairly obvious that it will be employed in unethical ends is wrong.
Wow, if this isn't one of the largest trolls I've seen. Most slashdotters, at least most vocal slashdotters, really despise Microsoft and think their software is low-quality, expensive, insecure, and, some argue, just plain evil. Just look at the Gates-as-Borg icon... :-)
If the Chinese violate human rights using MS software, well, it's not MS's fault. The Chinese are said to be heavy proponents of Linux and are developing their own distro. What happens in China is not Linus' fault either! Slashdot folk wisdom is right on this one: blame the person, not the tool. I can barely imagine the next article... "China uses gloves to slap dissidents; glove manufacturers blamed"
I know human rights abuse is a very serious issue and people die over such things. I think it's irresponsible to trivialize it by blaming a software manufacturer, even if it's MS.
OK, rant done. Go ahead, mod me down
No
People needs to be able to make a distinction between by a producer making a product that might be abused, and a producer that tailor a product for human right violations.
I do not claim that Microsoft does that, but bear in mind that Microsoft is a champion of DRM (under various names) to control and monitor users. So I would not put it past them to do what Amnesty International suspect them of doing.
DRM is all about producer control using private keys that you, the user, has no access to. Contrast this to Cryptography where strong cryptography can be used to ensure your privacy and that you are in control.
How do we know that free software isn't being used to violate human rights somewhere? I suspect you'll find that Linux, Apache, Sendmail, and other "free" tools have been used by drug dealers, slave merchants, religious fundamentalists, and totalitarian governments.
I don't see any prohibition in the GPL that prevents the use of "free" software for "immoral" purposes -- and such a clause (like many existing clauses of the GPL) would be completely unenforcable.
I dislike Microsoft for many reasons -- but this sort of posting on Slashdot smacks of sensationalism, ala Matt Drudge. Shame on you for spreading FUD.
All about me
>I would attack the government. It's a copout and rather easy to attack technology companies for doing what they know best...create technology.
.. that'd be so .. so .. unamerican! Free enterprise supposedly improves humanity and quality of life, so don't get in the way of it when it is being used specifically to repress those qualities, right?
AI has been attacking the Chinese government for decades. And don't be a complete moron here man; no one is trying to stop MS for creating good technology, only for selling it to a poli/econ system that MS wouldn't want be constrained by in their wildest dreams. The hypocricy is ludicrous. MS wouldn't exist if the US had similar laws and systems that China has.
The worst part is, its profitable for Western companies for China to remain communist, because it makes it easy to engineer sweetheart market deals with a nicely centralized economic engine such as the Chinese government. I'm all for free trade and such, but if you knowingly sell technology that will be used for human rights abuses, regardless of the legal status of the move, to me that doesn't make that company much different from the government that requested it. They are apparently both morally A-OK with the concept of human rights abuses if it furthurs their individual agendas, and thats precisely the mentality and value set that the UN sets out to combat, whether you're company or government.
But don't worry, I see your point. Going for self is the agenda we should all protect with every once of our beings. You can't blame somebody for trying to get richer or more profitable, just because it involves squashing political thought and human rights
Here's an easier solution: all parties involved are guilty to varying degrees. There's a reason why we have laws that punish those who knowingly help people to commit crimes.
But don't let that stop you from pouring energy into fighting an organization that wants to help stop human rights violations but lacks your wisdom and knowledge. Now *theres* a group of people who deserve to be on the receiving end of your activism.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Its easier turn a blind eye to personal accountability when there's a highly visible (evil) corporation to blame.
(No, I don't intend this as flame-bait, and I don't know Bill Gates personally.)
Guns/knives/WinNt/burgers don't kill people, people kill people.