Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Censors Chinese Blogger
wooppp writes "Microsoft has admitted to removing the blog of a Chinese journalist from MSN Spaces. The censored site has been re-hosted elsewhere after a short down-time, but is no longer accessible to the folks in China." From the ZDNet article: "MSN is committed to ensuring that products and services comply with global and local laws, norms and industry practices. Most countries have laws and practices that require companies providing online services to make the Internet safe for local users. Occasionally, as in China, local laws and practices require consideration of unique elements..."
What? No no no, you have it all wrong!
It's all quite simple. American law always applies, everywhere, all the time. Freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, legal process, religious conviction, Microsofts business practices within the EU etc. All of these laws apply to the entire four billion population of Earth.
Accept, of course, when it's something Slashbots don't like, such as the DMCA, USAPATRIOT, MPAA or RIAA lawsuits, censorship (Apart from the naughty-sex kind!). Those sorts of things are right out and the US has no right imposing it's laws on others!
It's called "Hypocritical sheep like mentality combined with a poor grasp on reality."
"MSN is committed to ensuring that products and services comply with global and local laws, norms and industry practices. Most countries have laws and practices that require companies providing online services to make the Internet safe for local users. Occasionally, as in China, local laws and practices require consideration of unique elements," the representative said.
1 9newworldofwork.asp
I am sure George Orwell's '1984', Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World', and even Bill Gate's 2005 article 'The New World of Work' would be banned as well.
http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/execmail/2005/05-
Quote: "Improving personal productivity: One consequence of an "always-on" environment is the challenge of prioritizing, focusing and working without interruption. Today's software can handle some of this, but hardly at a level that matches the judgment and awareness of a human being. That will change -- new software will learn from the way you work, understand your needs, and help you set priorities." (Bill Gates 5-19-05)
Unless you live in China.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I believe that it is unethical for a company to operate in a nation if the laws of that nation require them to behave unethically. They don't have any overriding need to operate in China. The only reason to do so is for profit.
So, they are violating this blogger's human rights (as defined by the UN's Universal Declaration on Human Rights) in order to make a profit.
The articles insn't really very clear on exactly how the blog was removed from MSN Spaces.
Was it simply the case that Chinese IPs were blocked from accessing it, or in fact was the entire blog simply removed from MSN Spaces altogether.
Either way is shameful, but if private companies begin to censor the web for everyone, worldwide, at the (implied) behest of autocracies, where will that leave us?
May the Maths Be with you!
They have. As an example, in Japanese it's now quite common to break down the (Cbinese) characters of a sensitive term into its component parts where possible and write them with separate characters, or write it with characters that can be read the same way but which have a different literal meaning.
Problem is Microsoft has always had trouble obeying the laws and avoiding illegal practices in the US and Eruope so why now suddenly start being all law abidding in china?
Because China is soon to be one of the worlds largest markets, and no company can afford to lose its foothold there, lest their more unscrupulous competitors use the China advatage to squeeze the life out of them.
Besides that, secretly, corperations love the Chinese Government. It's essentially a kind of facist state, which by and large means a corperate dreamland where workers have no rights, regulations are lax, corruption is the accepted means of business and there is stil a large enough rich people at the top to ensure that luxuries can be sold. In the case of China, these rich people often outnumber entire countires in former markets.
I fully expect unscrupulous corperations to be hugely successful in China. So successful, that the Chinese model will be lauded as superior, and we will all be pressured to convert to it, becoming dictartorships instead of democracies.
Greed is Good.
May the Maths Be with you!
i believe in speaking out against laws that are immoral to me, but one has to be willing to accept the consequences.
always mosh clockwise
Is Microsoft killing and imprisoning dissenters?
This kind of comment only serves to display your ignorance (as well as scoring easy points on /.)
First of all - have you actually read any Chinese laws? No? You can get them in translation, and they are not really all that draconian; in fact I suspect the average American could subscribe to them with no problems at all. But just like in USA, it is the way that the law is practised that matters. Is the police heavyhanded? Are the judges fair etc? And perhaps the Chinese are no worse off than the Americans in that respect either.
Secondly, what do you actually know about whether the Chinese feel free to speak their mind? I suspect you've never actually been there and spoken to ordinary Chinese. I have, many times, and I can testify that they are not in the least afraid of having an opinion or speaking it in public. I suspect a lot of the American ideas about this come from the time of the cultural revolution, where people were widely persecuted, not only for having the wrong opinions, but also for lots of other things, more or less at random. China has moved on from that - this is a common thing in the world: societies change over time; well, maybe not America, what so I know, but certainly China - how could anyone doubt that? Also, are you absolutely sure that you can get away with having the wrong opinions in America?
Thirdly, it sounds grand, all this drivel about 'ignore immoral laws'; just you try to do that in America. Or perhaps you don't fancy an unlimited holiday at Hotel Gitmo?
A very sound rule of thumb is, if a society is stable over time, then the population is by and large happy with the way things are. This is true not only for USA and Europe, but also for China and many other countries. The ordinary feel quite happy with the way their country is run, and if you actually believe in freedom, you should leave it to them to decide whether they like it.
I think a lot of you Americans need to revise your prejudices. As far as I can see your attitudes towards other countries, and in this particular case China, is caused by a combination of ignorance and simple jealousy - China is doing better and better, while America is going the opposite way, so they are simply 'evil communists' who persecute pious religious practitioners like Falun Gong, American style 'evangelicals' and other representatives of the worst in mankind.
Why does every conversation about China on Slashdot include some posters who point out immoral behavior in the United States? Are you trying the justify immoral behavior in China? Didn't anyone ever tell you that two wrongs don't make a right? Isn't that a level of emotional maturity we all master by the age of 9? I'm against immoral government behavior no matter which government is doing it. There are examples I can cite in both the United States and in China. USA: Death Penalty. China: Fearful censorship meant to stifle peaceful dissent.
Actually some shareholders do require integrity to invest in a company. Many small time shaheholders do and then few really big ones. One example of a really big one that does is the Norvegian state investment arm that invests the oil incomes. They have for example recently pulled out of companies that are involved in nuclear weapons work and have before pulled out from others with chilf labour and such.
Well yes.. opression will happen again.. and again.. as people do not seem ever to listen to the first signs of trouble.. and wait until it is too late.
Just wait for a Chinese communist to apply what he thinks is moral to US laws.
Well he can if he's voted in. That's what democracy is all about.
Osama is already doing it, and he feels just as righteous as you do.
You are only half correct. Osama Bin Laden has had a huge influence on US law. Possibly more so than anyone else in the last 50 years. However, I don't see how you feel he is applying his morality to US law. Unless you think, that Osama thinks it is moral to capture him, photograph his anus and then try him before a court martial in Cuba.
Morality is a flawed concept grounded in nothing but history. It is the residue of pre-scientific religious laws, just like ID is the residue of creation myths.
Actually morality seems to be based in large part on natural human behaviour. Just like murder, love, commerce, etc... Many argue that we have evolved to be moral creatures in response to the evolutionary benefits it provides. For example, almost all human societies believe that murder, theft, lying and rape are wrong. Even those societies without written history have various oral traditions that reinforce this.
As a counter example to your point, even societies with histories can be highly amoral. I won't mention any lest a certain law be invoked.
Morality can do nothing, except excuse your disrespect for Chinese law, but it is itself the only reason why you feel you should excuse that.
Morality can do many things, chief amoung them is to provide societies with a basic working framework. Morality can also be the foundation of law, but in many cases, such as in Chinese law, this is not the case, and in fact the law itself is immoral. The long term effects of this can be readily observed by Googling "The French Revolution".
May the Maths Be with you!
Yes. Stopping all economic activity between the US and the rest of the world would propably force the US government to perform its duty to protect its citizens by stopping them from being murdered by the state. As an added benefit, it would force the rest of the world to cut its dependency on US economy. So in short, both US citizens and everyone else would benefit.
Death penalty is not only barbaric, it is also a threat to everyone, guilty and innocent alike; after all, wrongfull judgements happen. Lifetime imprisonment is sufficient to keep dangerous criminals out of the streets, and revenge is insufficient justification for risking an innocent getting executed.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Did you bother to RTFA? Questions still remain over why a site believed to be hosted in the United States has to comply with Chinese law.
If the blog were hosted in China, then Chinese law might be applicable. The 'blog was hosted here. MS took it upon themselves to delete the 'blog so the Chinese government wouldn't be offended. By your logic, nothing other than Disney should be hosted on the Internet, since it might be against the law somewhere. Your "don't pay taxes" scenario is silly because it's not at all the same situation - MS is under no obligation to obey Chinese law on servers located in the US.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
Heh, this is almost fun.
Nope, this is just your usual dictatorship FUD; keep the population poor, afraid and ignorant.
Poor:
An Analysis of the Presidents Who Are Responsible For Excessive Spending
Bush Borrowed More Than All Previous Presidents Combined, Group Says
Surplus? US Debt Pushes $6 Trillion
U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK (this is a very interesting one, in my humble opinion)
(hint: guess whose taxes are going to pay for that)
Afraid:
U.S. Department of Defense News About The War On Terrorism
The War On Terrorism
AMERICA'S WAR AGAINST TERRORISM
Ignorant:
Education Not a Bush Budget Priority, Representative Miller to Testify
Bush Budget Slashes Education, Other Domestic Programs
$2.5 Trillion Budget Plan Cuts Many Programs
Bush administration Cuts Public School Funding to Pay for New Private School Voucher Scheme
And you complain about China? I'm afraid you have the same problems in your country (assuming you're American).
My site
E.g.: Killing another person is wrong, except when in self-defense or defending another.
:D)
So it is okay to kill abortion providers, if one believes that abortion == murdering a human being, and that by killing the doctor they're saving lives?
This is why the law isn't open to individual interpretation. Everyone's got a different idea of what is moral and what isn't.
(And now I bet I get modded flamebait or troll
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
It's not bad form to compare Communist China with National Socialist Germany. Both are non free countries which engaged in systematic censorship and murder.
It is bad form to co-operate with either and Bill Gates should be ashamed. Richard Nixon's policy of engagement was more a case of Machiavelli's help the weaker of two enemies than co-operating with a murderer. With the stronger of the two gone, the remaining enemy should be shunned. Co-operation with China today is a classic example of selling the rope to your executioner. Bill Gates, by shutting down a US cite at China's request, is saying that he's willing to subject US citizens to Chinese publication law. That does not make Bill Gates a murderer, but it does make him someone who's willing to violate your rights to help a lawless regime.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I find it so odd. If a US company that does business with a foreign government ignores the laws in that company it gets nailed for being an all powerful multi-national evil mega-corp unless you don't agree with that countries laws?
I happen to agree that Microsoft should not have pulled it but I often considered US centric in my opinions. How should a company act when faced with a country that doesn't respect the core values of that companies home country?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
To me this is the perfect example of why capitalism != democracy.
And by the way, has anyone noticed China setting up a capitalistic communism? Did they just look at the U.S. And U.S.S.R. during the cold war and say "Yeah, a little of both please" and pick out the worst of both worlds?
It is NOT Microsoft's job, or any other corporation, to decide what laws they should and should not obey.
...
But that's exactly what they did here. They decided that, on their servers here in America, they should honor laws in another country that violate US, UN and every other legitimate standard of human rights.
A global corporation will be expected to enforce local laws of nationals who are using its service.
In the absense of US law then they are required to follow local law and that is as it should be.
Horsefeathers. In some countries, it's illegal for women to seek an education. Is it your contention that all information sites are responsible for identifying women from such countries and refusing to allow them to access their site?
If MS had servers located in China, then you might very well be right. If you're IN a country, you follow that countries laws or face the consequences. MS wasn't in their country. Their laws are not binding here. MS choose to censor someone so that they would not risk offending the Chinese government.
the American people can feel free to elect leaders that will require US multinationals to treat every person on earth as though they are US citizens. If that were the case then MS would not only not have to obey the Chinese government but they'd be breaking the law if they did.
Actually, rightly or wrongly, America already has laws against discrimination. If the blogger were here and able to file a lawsuit against MS, he'd very likely have a strong case that MS was discriminating against Chinese nationals. But of course there's little danger of MS having to face that. The person in question is in a distant country and already facing persecution from his government. Filing a lawsuit against MS probably isn't very high on his agenda.
Personally, I don't think MS should face any legal repercussions for what they did. It's MS's server, and MS should have the right to refuse to do business with anyone they choose, for whatever reason they choose. But having a right to do something doesn't mean it's right to do it. US citizens have the right to join the KKK but that doesn't justify doing so. MS deserves to be soundly and publically lambasted for what they did. MS should have a right to deny controversial Chinese bloggers access to their servers. But I also have a right to tell them that I think they're a piece of crap for doing so.
"The legitimate powers of government extend only to such acts as are injurious to others." Thomas Jefferson.
I remember back some years ago during Apartheid, Polaroid got raked over the coals for selling products to the government of South Africa for making ID cards. All they did was sell product to a government and that got them accused of facilitating oppression. Now, Microsoft is an active and willing partner in oppression and the reaction in the mainstream media doesn't approach that earlier firestorm.
Einhverfr here.
It amounts to the same thing. The Chinese government is in a position of selecting who will and will not use their labor, and how much they will enforce laws that are not to their advantage (i.e. copyright law). In order for us to continue enjoying the profits we've become used to, we must see things their way or the deals may change. Either way it translates to principles versus lost money, not that MS feels cowed by the red army.
I am not so sure though. My point is that MS already has huge problems in China both on a governmental and a popular level. But these stem from a bad image on the popular level, not anything really to do with the government. In essence Microsoft has let themselves be identified with the British in the Opium Wars (Gates' 1998 interview with Money Magazine) and the US bombing of a Chinese embassy (not their fault, but...) so I don't see this actually changing anything for or against them one way or another.
They have also had a number of run-ins with the government (forced to stop calling Taiwan a country) and a number of other things. However, again, these have never caused undue issues with the government. Indeed currently the government is quite dependant on Microsoft software.
I probably shouldn't say this because I am not sure if it violates my NDA, but when I was at Microsoft (2002, I think was when this happened), Microsoft actually provided assistance to the Chinese gov't to allow them to replace the crytographic API layers in Windows, so there is a fair degree of perceived mutual dependence and yet a very high degree of mutual mistrust.
My problem with this is that by allowing US hosting services to become tools of Chinese censorship, they are allowing the Chinese to censor the internet rather than merely the access of Chinese citizens to the internet.
Corporations exist to maximize shareholder value. But increasingly many are starting to see value as including a social agenda as well as financial gains. At shareholder meetings there has been a growing movement to try to pass shareholder resolutions involving support for human rights in China. I expect that this stunt will continue to accellerate this trend. If so, this may well be a pyrhic victory for the Chinese gov't.
I have seen several people fired from my company for saying anti-China things (not anti-Chinese mind you, it was aimed directly at the gov't not the people). In an effort to conduct "consistent" business processes, and "comply with global standards" however, even our US facilities are regulated China-style.
I don't suppose you'd want to name that company, so I can avoid buying from such spineless bootlickers.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.