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..."
Occasionally, as in China, local laws and practices require consideration of unique elements...
Like the suppression of independent, free thought? Way to support 'em, Microsoft! Sleep well at night!
I have no problem with not pissing off the chinese. Have you ever seen a Bruce Lee movie? I ain't f'n with those peeps.
Do you believe that Microsoft and MSN should obey the law and avoid illegal practices?
If so, doesn't that apply just as much in China as in America?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
A lot more information on this story can be found at Rebecca MacKinnon's RConversation.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Is the Chinese government taking an equally aggressive stand within their own country to eliminate piracy of software, music, and video?
when companies who claim to take pride in living in a "free" country facilitate repression abroad.
I, for one, welcome our new Chinese overlords!
Rational discussion may now resume.
"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
Thanks for the interesting link. I wonder if their censorship software is smart enough to detect modified versions of forbidden language like: F@lun G0ng. You would think these kind of usages would spring up for the same reasons they have in the west.
an ill wind that blows no good
Seriously, I'm ready to step in and bash Microsoft at the drop of a hat, but MS isn't cenoring the reporter - CHINA IS. This just silly. Microsoft is obviously bound by the laws of the countries that it does business in.
We report that the views were controversial for China, but apparently that makes them unreportable. What, are we hoping a Chinese audience will be able to find the story now?
(As far as Microsoft being ever so scrupulous about adhering to international standards, it's impressive how multinational corporations cover their butts when an authoritarian state is offended. Their commitment to international practices is even more impressive when local labor standards give them what amounts to slave labor.)
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
...on the same site? What happens if the Chinese govt. decides that a US blogger is violating their laws?
Too bad this wasn't the blog of an American citizen living in China. An American company assisting with foreign government censorship is quite ironic....
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!
It would be far more interesting if TFA was not in Chinese, seeing as how I don't speak it and all. So, to all of you people out there that speak both Chinese and English, what did the guy say that was so controversial?
-Arthur
Cave ne ante ullas catapultas ambules
Nothing could be more true!
...why does MS obey the laws in China when they don't obey the laws in America?
Perhaps we can learn something from the Chineese.
And I thought I was the only one.
Me too, until I saw your sig. Did you try emailing moderation@slashdot.org to enquire about your bad?
but keep bashing Microsoft as the personification of evil if it helps you forget these things:
Google Bows to Chinese Censorship
How about Yahoo:
Information supplied by Yahoo ! helped journalist Shi Tao get 10 years in prison
and there is this on Cisco and China:
China's Internet: Let a Thousand Filters Bloom
Is this sig nificant?
The problem becomes where does the right to free speech stop? Slashdot has rules about posting; not many, but enough. Despite the fact that the Bill of Rights guarantees your right to say what you think, Slashdot is under no obligation to promote your ideas or encourage you to speak them.
For example, you may be a racist; you have a vaild right to be one and to say anything you like about any group that doesn't fit in your personal view of the world. Slashdot does not have to give you a forum for your ideas; in fact, it would probably be deluged with complaints about what you said and eventually forced to remove your words from the site. That's not censorship, but responsibility to the public. Because the individual has a right to free speech does not mean that society at large has to be forced to listen.
Do the Chinese people have a right to free speech? Inherently, yes. Does the Chinese government have the right to curtail that freedom? Yes, since they are the duly empowered government of the country. Do the Chinese people have to take this? No, in the sense that there are a 1.3 billion Chinese and I dare say the number in government is not that large. Of course, the government has the guns and bombs. In the end, we may rail against the injustice we see in China, but it is up to the Chinese people to change it, as we did when we were ruled by the British in the 18th Century.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
Or maybe, just maybe, somebody made a few too many disguised links to goatse pictures.
Stop with the paranoia. It was probably someone from his IP (or area) engaging in actual abusive practices, not simply because of a difference of opinion.
If you've followed Slashdot for a while, you'll notice that the only constant is being disagreeable. What to disagree with actually varies quite a bit simply based on the content of the article.
Throw the bums out!
Maybe someone can explain to me how it is called 'censorship' when a private company voluntarily block/removes content. It is my understanding that censorship is practiced "often by government intervention" according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship.
So if someone illegally paints a swastika on my house, is it censorship for me to remove it? I hope someone could explain the difference to me.
When you fail to take a stand, you still are taking a stand, and the result is a lower standard of freedom for all.
MSFT did not need to comply with this law immediately -- they could have:
1) Ignored it
2) Caved under intense visible pressure
3) Sought the backing of the US State Department
Instead we've missed another opportunity to define the Internet as bigger than any one country's limited perspective. Or maybe that was the point...
You are in a maze of twisty little passages; all alike.
Yes. My sig contains the meat of the response. I was amazed.
an ill wind that blows no good
But of course, only those laws that might cause it to lose substantial business, or cooperation on reducing piracy of it's products. And hey, if those laws result in the loss of some individual's basic human rights, what does Mr. Bill care?
As a nation, we should stand for freedom, most especially for freedom of speech, because that's the one freedom from which all the others come. As long as we can all talk, we don't necessarily have to resort to violence to bring about change.
Any corporation organized in the U.S. has a moral responsibility to act ethically as any other good U.S. citizen. I think that involves some civil disobedience when it comes to laws that deny the freedom of speech to citizens in other countries. If Microsoft wants to cater to China, it should move there. I wonder how Bill Gates will feel about freedom of speech then?
As the conservatives in our country are so fond of saying, "Freedom isn't Free." If we aren't willing to pay the price, we don't deserve it. That applies just as much to our corporate citizens as to anyone else. Perhaps given the special privileges corporations incresingly enjoy, they should bear a greater burden of that cost.
-All that is gold does not glitter - Tolkien
www.ra
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!
MS has a very important relationship with China. Thomas Friedman in his book, "The World is Flat" explains how Chinese universities send MS their top students. He says that in China, Bill Gates is Britney Spears, while in America, Britney Spears is Britney Spears, and that's one of the main problems here... Anyway, I doubt MS is going to do anything to threaten their relationship with the country that provides them so many of their best employees.
"local laws and practices require consideration of unique elements..."
The "unique elements" here being the fact that CCP would never be re-elected elected in a democratic election, having been responsible for the deaths of 70 million chinese nationals plus hundreds of thousands of Americans, North Koreans and Vietnamse.
The CCP is running scared of democracy because it would mean more power to the chinese people full stop.
When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
By quasi silencing this blogger MS has now given his blog much more significant publicity than he could ever have got had MS not taken any action. It shows how "censorship" seldom works.
"MSN is committed to ensuring that products and services comply with global and local laws, norms and industry practices..."
I haven't had such a good laugh in so long...
Nothing like a monopolist striving fascist ....eh!
(-hrair-)
Beware of the shining wires...
MSN is committed to ensuring that products and services comply with global and local laws, norms and industry practices
Good luck, then, because that's unpossible.
Helpful tip: Laws from other countries often conflict with each other!
Microsoft is making a public forum accessible in a place where it's extremely difficult to say controversial things publically. Like it or not, with a population in the billions, China's a major market segment for any company, and no one wants to get shut out of that.
I wonder what things would be like now had the Soviet Union managed to stay intact in the "mass media" Internet age. Surely there was some net access available to a select few behind the Iron Curtain, but I can't imagine it would be easy for, say, East Germany to control their media completely.
I think they did the right thing on this. Our country's laws are not necessarily the world standard, and other countries are free to follow whatever policy they please. They're also free to block access to things they see as dangerous. We do this "in reverse" all the time...other countries are much more liberal in terms of what can be seen on TV, etc. To please the religious crew, we censor broadcast media and let people who want to see more subscribe to cable. The problem opens up when you inject a stateless medium such as the internet.
Not to buy Windows Vista
Submit and download your homegrown music on www.audiodropout.com
Despite the fact that the Bill of Rights guarantees your right to say what you think
A popular misconception. The first amendment guarantees your right that the government will not abridge your right to say what you think. Congress specifically by the text, and the state governments as well by later supreme court interpretation.
Private citizens and entities can do it all they want, however. Tell you boss off, you'll be sent packing.
Is anyone else reminded of the Amatuer Action BBS prosecution? Back in 1994 a California man and his wife ran a for-pay BBS (yes dial-up) with downloadable porn. A Tennessee postal inspector downloaded some porn from them and when he got it, he shipped THEM some child porn and then charged them with obscenity and had them extradited to Tennessee. If I recall correctly, they were convicted and the man at least served time. All for material that was perfectly legal in California but apparently not in Tennessee.
At the time there was a lot of concern about the net becoming regulated by the laws of the most restrictive state. Funny how that seems to be the case nowadays, except it is the corps doing the 'regulation' and not the governments per se.
(PS, for some reason there is very little record of the whole Amatuer Action BBS fiasco in google's database, very odd for what was such a big deal at the time.)
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Same!
Not sure what they mean by "If it's someone else, this is a chance to hunt them down."
When I replied "It isn't me making bad posts! What is going on?" I got this back:
"28 times?" That got me wondering, so I enquired further:
> How do you figure that??
>
> http://slashdot.org/~wombatmobile
Robert Rozeboom replied:
Scoble covered this a few days ago. He went into MS to try and dig up why they did this. Why shut down free-speech. While he couldn't discuss everything he hints at the reasons. What do you think?
We're committed to making money no matter the cost to human freedom.
---Technology will liberate us if it doesn't enslave us first.
I agree that the laws in China are bad, and that we rightly consider China to be behind the times in certain areas like wages, quality of life, and pesky "human rights". But I'm glad that Microsoft, Apple, Google and others are doing business there, because that's what will change the opinions and policies of the Chinese people and government. The more China is included in the global economy, the more it will be encouraged and required to conform to global standards. Think of glasnost and perestroika in the USSR, the Berlin wall, and others. You think China hasn't noticed the success of capitalism in Hong Kong and Taiwan? It might be changing slowly, but it is changing. In the meantime, I do think that Microsoft and others should follow China's laws, even if they are bad. As said before, it is the cost of doing business there. Also, before you condemn those companies for doing so, bear in mind that when they sell products to China they are helping to reduce the trade deficit and are bringing money back here to the USA.
One: Microsoft is all about the dollars. Because this involves Microsoft, this, too, is all about the dollars.
Two: Freedom of speech is protected under the Constitution of the United States of America, not under the Chinese version. If these people want free speech, they can either change their government or move to a country that supports free speech. It is not up to Microsoft or the USA to enforce free speech (or any other freedom) in other countries. That's what got us into Iraq.
Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
I forget about none of it they are all on my ka ka list!
Never use google search why should i support them.
Yahoo same don't use any of their services nor give them support.
Cisco i wouldn't deal with either so what's your point? We should be lambasting them here all at the same time instead of pouring it onto MS?
Then by all means let's.. OTOH the subject of the article of this thread was about MS so you can hardly blame us for concentrating on them now can you?
Coward? Coward! Thems fighten words!!
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.
This doesn't even meet the test of "banning". MSN is not trying to prevent others from publishing (although China is!).
This is most like "refusal to publish", which the /. editurds can hardly protest given the number of stories they reject! Including all of mine so I stop submitting.
Perhaps you don't like MSNs' possible reasons or motivation for refusing to publish. OK. I don't like /.'s either. Adjust your business accordingly. They won't like it, but you have your rights too.
what MS SHOULD do is make the blogs themselves invisible to the communists / governments, thereby ensuring freedom of speech for all and MS can just say, well we think you're catching it all that's why there is no more objectionable content on the entire web, and the entire world is now / must obviously be towing the chinese line ... the censors would not be able to view the blogs, and therefore can not object to content that they do not even know is there for others to see ... and MS can come across without egg on their face ... for a change
Question Authority before IT questions You
Yeah and the nazis had "unique" local laws and practices, too. I'm sorry, but China oppressing its people and killing off dissidents goes a little beyond that. But hey money talks, and I'm sure China dumps a lot of it into Microsoft. Why would they want to lose that profit?
The longer that Microsoft manages to stay in China, the longer the Chinese military will have to put up with bluescreens (redscreens?). Works for me.
For the love of God, please learn to spell "ridiculous"!!!
We don't hate to be haters we hate to be lovers..... Err wait it's we love to be.... No that's not right either.......
Ok we hate cause we love MS so much we......... No i can't even say that without falling over laughing.
Ok! Ok.... whewh! We hate so MS will relize we want them to stop making us hate them so they can act more like the company we want to love.
In other words we want them to be ethical and moral and act on issues like this without thinking with their pocket book or with their bank accounts in mind when they should be thinking with some measure of a moral and ethical compase instead of with none whatso ever.
So we don't hate really we just want MS to use a different set of rules for dealing with these issues than it has up to this point. Something MS has never been good at doing BTW.
Coward? Coward! Thems fighten words!!
Boy am I happy to be an American, but let's take a step back. We have certain rights and freedoms here in the USA, and we're proud of it. But we're a sovereign state and China is a different sovereign state. Should we be trying to impose our standards on another country? What if China pushed their agenda on us? YES, China's policies may be bad for the common Chinese person, but are we really encouraging those policies by doing business in China and abiding by Chinese law while doing so? Or are we helping to change the bad policies? All I'm saying is you can't be a missionary to a foreign country without GOING there.
Move along folks. There's nothing to see here. The user deliberately terminated their post for humor value. No government, private or foreign agency was involved in the truncation of the parent post, or for the poster's completely voluntary relocation to Syria.
Go back to your homes, watch some football and have a nice fast food meal, secure in the knowledge that whatever the government does, it's for the purpose of protecting your rights and ensuring your safety from TERRORIST!!!!!!!
9/11, 9/11, You all must remember 9/11.
"Live Free or Die." Don't like it? Then keep out of the USA
This isn't simply a case of a company complying with local law. China's censorship of Zhao's blog is actually illegal under Chinese law. It violates article 35 of The Constitution of the People's Republic of China, which guarantees freedom of speech and article 41, which specifically protects the right to criticize the government. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Microsoft acted in response to the order of a court. What we're talking about here is compliance with an illegal request. There may be an argument that Microsoft could not afford to refuse to comply, but any moral argument that Microsoft has an obligation to obey local law is bogus.
The subbtle difference is that, above the countries and their specific laws, there are international laws and human rights.
Free speech is a human right. (It is stated in article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and although it isn't a legally binding document, this right is reformulated in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (by coincidence also article 19) which is a legally binding document).
So it's not about enforcing american view in foreign countries (which is completly stupid, but is what the **AA are trying to do with the DMCA) or some specific weird views (your imaginary "tax are immoral" situation) in a specific country (tax must be paid in the USA), it's about trying to enforce fundamental human rights independently of local laws.
That's the difference between finding taxes immoral and fighting for freedom of speech.
(Note: Have no knowledge in internation laws except for the fraction we learned studying legal medicine)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
1st 4+ post: That's just business..(Score:5, Insightful)
2nd 4+ post: No, it isn't (Score:5, Insightful)
So you are worng, there was a discussion similar to this one.
My city: Barcelona.
Those of you rushing to Microsoft's defense are doing more damage than good. Alone, this could eventually blow over as an oversight or mistake or a bad judgement call. But when the Internet's discussion is interrupted by a few "bystander" posters who each rush in to flame us all and declare Microsoft innocent, then it's only too obvious that you're the paid "clean-up crew" hired by Microsoft, and that makes the action premeditated.
He wants his opinion openly known to the CHINESE public. It is not as if he's been banned from posting, d'uh. If he has been banned from posting he'd be in jail now. He's back online now, but regrettably gone back where he originally started in Blog City.
Do you think it is feasible for him to ask every reader to install freenet in order to read his posts? Blog City is blocked by the GFW because of him, and people are still fuming about such consequences.
He has to resort to ask his beloved readers to use proxies, feedburner or even email subscription in order to read his post!
(N.B. Blogger is also TOTALLY BLOCKED by the GFW, think about the far-reaching consequences... MSN is one of the few sites which is OPEN at the moment and enjoys wide readership. In fact, the top ten blogs in China (in terms of traffic) are all hosted in MSN, go figure...)
28481k
If China asks, will Bill Gates remove all references to the above from MSN, hosted in the US, like he did this Blog?
"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.
China and the Xbox are where he's proving his censorship potential and his lack of trust in everyone.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
I dealt with the same creep. It seems to me it would be useful for a user to see this information. I had no indication of bad standing until I got booted.
an ill wind that blows no good
My position on Google, Microsoft, Reuters--any information provider, really--setting up shop in China is that a Truly Un-Evil Company would not comply with the censorship rules. They'd pull out, no big fuss or press release. Only an Evil company would justify the assistance of the denial of human rights with "it's just the cost of doing business". That is, the cost is too high.
China's staggering prosperity has a big speed bump in the road ahead, and it's impossible to tell how far away it is--or how fast it will continue to grow. The speed bump is Human Rights, i.e., sooner or later, the problem will come to a head. Critical mass. The legendary Hundredth Monkey. They'll be Mad As Hell, and they're Not Going To Take It Any More.
I find it deplorable--no, unconscionable that corporations are investing in a totalitarian government. Then again, it's implausible to me that our own government is headed in the same direction. Are we bound to fulfill the cyberpunk genre's bleak future just because too many of us have read about it?
The United States took a cue from Israel a few years back in not dealing with terrorists. I guess that only applies to independent terrorists, i.e., if their organization is big enough, we'll not only deal with them, we'll trade with them.
"Press to test."
(click)
"Release to detonate."
Removed entirely, according to BoingBoing.
MSN ought to comply with national laws, and be willing to assist in making sure a nation's citizens comply with them, even when Microsoft doesn't agree with those laws. (Would that Microsoft did that with business practice laws in the US and EU....) However, there are ways to do so, while still fighting censorship. Presumably, the Chinese were the ones objecting. They want the blog removed? Fine; but put the official objection complaint from the Chinese Government up instead. Or see if Chilling Effects is willing to expand their program, and try to have them host the official notice.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Everyone's seen it probably a hundred times. What is the point of dragging it out again just now? Are you saying that first, Microsoft came for a Chinese blogger, and you didn't speak out because you are not a Chinese blogger? Is Microsoft going to come for you next, and no one will be left to speak for you?
No seriously, STOP CUTTING AND PASTING THIS CRAP ON SLASHDOT.
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;
*AHEM*
From the RConversation blog:
"In the final days of December, Anti became a vocal supporter of journalists at the Beijing Daily News who walked off the job after the top editors were fired for their increasingly daring investigative coverage, including some recent reporting on the recent police shootings of village protestors in the Southern China. (For all the gory details on the current press crackdown click here, here, here, and here.)
In other words, Microsoft is scratching China's back in supporting the slaughter of innocents, and shutting the mouth of whoever tries to bring that to the public.
If that's not Draconian, my friend, then I don't know what the eff it is.
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.
Not only does it smack of slavery, their use of the term "unique elements" reminds me of "peculiar institution."
Sometime.. not all the time.. we get very insighful comment on /. and that's one on them.
I don't know where you come from, but in civilized societies we at least pretend to accept that just because we might not know what the perfict truth is - doen't mean that it's a feeling or opinion. The fact is that people have rights, these rights are not rocket science nor that hard to understand - maybe chineese culture says gravity pulls upward too? So what, it doesn't change the reality. Free speech is one of those rights that have been accepted as a fundamental one for a long time. This isn't some advanced imcomprehensible theory where we just don't know what the best solution is.
Now if you want to make a compelling argument about why people should have their opinions forbidden, then fine. But I suspect you won't do that because you will logically and factually be ripped to shreds like the thousands that have tried before you. Hiding behind the guise of cultural norms for the sake of not wanting to argue the facts is intellectual cowerdace.
If MS censors some articles, don't they become automatically liable for everything on their servers? (i.e. don't they loose the protection given to "common carriers"?) Risky move, isn't it?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/446016 8.stm
It makes some good points.
Like how the western media doesn't care about who Chinese bloggers are and what they are blogging about, what gets censored, and importantly what doesn't. It only have a single point when talking about Chinese blogs: Censorship.
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.
Gimp Activism
MjM
XKCD:Xeric Knowledge Comically Dispen
Microsoft... Where Don't you wan't to go today?
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Why does MS feel a need to follow Chinese law when they don't follow US law?
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Every punishment for a crime takes away somebody's rights, but the death penalty is not a human rights violation when done as justice. The people who are on death row in the US are NOT there because they have simply expressed opinions. In fact the only way to get on death row in the US is to be charged and found guilty of murder in front of a jury of peers with appropiate legal representation - this is a far cry from the Chineese system and it's disingenuoius to even compare.
These people are not being put to death to torment them, torture them, drive fear into non murderors, or even harm them (even thought that is the effect). It is simply about removing violent people from society, and setting an example - in practice, it isn't even for revenge and is implemented in a way that minimizes personal pain. This is plain and simple justice.
Now I personally think that there are very compelling legal cost reasons not to have the death penalty, and that there are very compelling reasons from the perspective that justice systems make mistakes from time to time - and this is one mistake that can't be undone. And even arguments that society is safer when governments don't have that power at all. But the death penalty is not a human rights violation any more than it is if I shoot someone who busts into my house and is threatening the safety of my wife and daughter.
The UN is just wrong here and is kneejerking to some political interest.
This and what China (and MS) did does not even compare, I challenge anyone to make such a compelling argument as to why it's ok to coercively forbid people from expressing their opinions.
Or you could boycott China by stop buying anything "Made in China".
But we won't do that, will we?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Maybe Chineese law says that Microsoft should hunt down bad bloggers and pop a bullet in their head too. But really, since when is anyone other than China pre-dispositioned to to enforce chineese laws for them. This was Microsofts choice, not China's.
One more thing. Miscosoft is a US company, traded on US stock exchanges, incorporated in US terrortiroes. If they can't deal with that, then they are free to move to China, in the meantime it is not unreasonable for us and the rest of the world to expect Microsoft to act according to US norms.
Hopefully this kind of thing will jog people to realize that "free markets" don't necessarily tend towards personal and political freedom. This is the difference between your methodology and the moral ground from which the boundaries of your actions spring.
Put capitalism and free markets in place in a totalitarian society and they work just as well, and will cheerfully help the local autocrat do whatever he wants. Put them in place in a society where a strong sense of personal libery exists, and the market will adapt to that.
Capitalism is just as happy to sell you Zyklon B as it is to sell you little American flags to wave around.
http://img497.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fullcompl iance1lm.jpg
Will code a sig generator for food
#1 Microsoft can do whatever the heck it wants with data on it's servers, unless the law intervenes in some way, such as breach of contract. Free speech does not apply to private companies. They don't even need to use the local law excuse.
#2 What they are doing is technically legal, but is objectional from an ethical and moral standpoint... unless Microsoft does not adhere to the ethical and moral standards of a liberal democratic society. (Surprise, surprise, surprise!) Unfortunately, there's no reason that they have to have a liberal democratic conscience. Unless they are part of the government, liberal democracy generally grants the individuals within it the ability to hold any moral standards they want which are not in conflict with the law. This tolerance is also extended to corporations, for the most part.
Conclusion and Opinion: Microsoft wants to kiss China's ass. They have every right to do so, and it may well make good business sense to do so. It doesn't matter if the blog was hosted in China, the US or in the Vatican. If Microsoft wants to accept that Chinese laws apply to their services hosted in the US, they have every right to limit themselves that way.
I'd tell you to boycott Microsoft, but you know as well as I do that they wouldn't even notice. The only thing that will fix corporations is realizing that they are made up of people and finding a way to make sure that people in those companies are BOTH business-savvy AND principled. Good luck with that.
I am sympathetic to the idealism expressed pertaining to the topic, however... idealism is practically naïve. For example, a cop pulls me over, as i'm riding my bicycle at 8:30am in my sleepy little town, trying to catch the city-bound bus. He's bored, and I "look suspicious" because I'm carrying a little baggage "early in the morning, in a tourist town." He asks me to show what's inside. Now legally I don't have to show him anything--and legally he can't search me without a warrant--but I open the bags on the ground, and gently sift through them as he stands watching. Why? Because I'm not willing to take one for the team, you fucks! (I'm not going to risk missing the bus while confronting the cop on a trivial matter.)
Based on Gitmo, various renditions, detention without appeal, random "enemy combatant", and designated "free speach zones" I've got a feeling we won't hear from you for awhile if you did #1 today...
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
Where, when, with what group of people? As someone who's been to Shanghai, I can tell you that my girlfriend and her friends FEAR talking about chinese politics. When you you bring up subject that even remotely come close, they just shake their head and say it's best not to talk about it. When I ask her why at least, she said "I don't want trouble, I want to be a normal citizen without troubles".
Ya...she really likes to speak her mind freely. Sounds like total oppression to me!
Life is not for the lazy.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapac ific/view/186885/1/.html
.tar or .zip file of them.
While reading the article, I wondered whether ms actually "deleted" the blog, or just crippled outside access attempts. I am sure that there are archives, and if so, they would be useful for both the courts and Zhao Jing.
It would be mind-boggling that ms China or ms *pickyourplace* would just "delete" the files.
If the files are not truly deleted, and if Zhao Jing offers say, US$300 for their assistance (and to make up for his not keeping backups... even text archives would have been smart to have-- they needn't be actual page archives, unless there was a forensic reason to have them...), then microsoft should use one of their "technology innovations" (if they really have any, and I suspect that for internal reasons they DO have this capability) scripts to scrounge up Zhao Jing's files and deliver him a
Having him removed from the web might be gratifying for Beijing, but if he hasn't been raided and arrested or censured in other ways, and considering that others surely have copies of his works, then denying him his own copies is just an exercise in punishment. But, then, I suppose that is an internal matter.
But this is an exercise in showing us that we need to keep backups, regardless of the material, unless your material is a jailable offence (ce vs se intentional), in which case one probably would **NOT** want to back it up. OTOH, publicly claiming to not have copies could be an attempt to dissuade heavy-handed searches. But, even here in the USA, I could claim "I have no backups" or "I never made any and therefore could not have secreted them away somewhere", but the US would have its own reasons to do a domestic "rendition" toward "finding out what it wants to find out...".
Reminds me of the Air Force officer in the old Trek episode when Kirk was trying to find the film reels from Captain Christopher's interceptor: "We are not DUMMIES, Mister. We have ways of finding out what we want to know!"...(Of course, the funny part was to follow: "What is that? A uniform of some kind?" "What, this? Just something I slipped on/into (this morning)?", which led to "charge you with espionage, sabotage..." "Did I sabotage something"..
And, it thickens with: "No, but what WOULD you have done had we not interrupted you?")
And that, my fellow slashers is what ANY government would boil it's explanations down to, Chinese, Japanese, UK, anywhere, EVEN the "good 'ole USofA"... And, in the true spirit of capitalism, a goodly number of high tech firms RIGHT here in silicon valley tailor their hardware and software "offerings" (in the name of making a buck) to enable governments of whatever nation to intercept, disrupt, interrupt, off-line-scan, archive, and many other ways manipulate data traffic in to and out of their respective borders. It's NOT just mshaft, it's your video companies, voice and IP companies, routers, switching and others. Even SOFTWARE office suite companies have been found to have embedded "language assistance" "backdoor" tools in "foreign" editions of their suites, all at the benefit of US government security services. Given time, all (or almost all) companies of any country will be compelled to not only escrow over the encryption keys, but facilitate in other ways the breaking and reading and almost-traceless manipulation of files for evidence purposes.
WHEW, I need to put a cold towel on my forehead...
Word Image: "encircle"
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
"MSFT did not need to comply with this law immediately -- they could have:
...
3) Sought the backing of the US State Department"
And why would the US State Department help MS take a stand against the Chinese government? The US economy is being propped up by the Chinese government (who are the primary financiers of our operating deficits) and the US CANNOT afford to piss off China much. We're already having problems because China is no longer buying as agressively as they were. Plus, China did us a solid by unpegging their currency from the dollar... not that it's not pegged anymore, just not solely to the dollar. We still owe them for that.
Considering that we have issuess with N. Korea, certain ex-Soviet states, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc... the US needs very stable relations with China. Picking a fight over a blog isn't exactly working to maintain the status quo.
Not only that, but it would look silly in the international arena. With all the international publicity of our trampling of human rights, what country wouldn't laugh at the US if we tried to take the moral high ground in re: censorship?
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
MS is powerfull enough to change this, and in fact be a strong tool in helping people enact a democracy and strengthen free market.
In fact, it is very short sight of MS(or any American company) not to do this.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Microsoft has no choice because China continually threatens to use Red Flag Linux, which was Slashdot's Great White Hope of 2001 (or thereabouts).
;-))
(Of course, many here would love to see Microsoft defy China's government in hopes that it would lead to Linux' userbase instantly growing by a billion. j/k
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
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.
Parallel situations exist in hardware companies as well. We care less about copyrights and more about the factories that we have invested quite a lot in bringing up, maintaining and educating. Of course, we're not allowed to keep pictures of those factories on our desks, talk about our visits to them, or discuss things like size, shape, locations, numbers of buildings etc.
The only thing global corps won't do is crap in their own bed, so they will not enforce global standards requiring employment practices that are incompatible ith american law.
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.
What if... What if the "local laws" mandated the use of slave labor? Would Microsoft then engage in slave labor? What if local laws forbade the hiring of Falun Gong workers, would Microsoft seek out and fire those employees? No matter how onerous and immoral the local law, would Microsoft seek to enforce it?
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
It's pretty simple, really. Microsoft is letting itself be muscled because it doesn't want to jeapardize the "business" arrangement with the Chinese. China does not make-or-break the game-plan for Microsoft, so I believe that they are being needlessly timerous by backing down from the Chinese. Microsoft has just a couple of their smallest toes in China ...
More ominous are thoughts about the kind of undue muscling one would be subjected to if one's whole leg were in China ...
Examples:
1 - Walmart (80 billion)
2 - U.S. Treasury (300 billion)
Hmmmmm ...
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.
Especially when the submitter leaves out the most important bit: Questions still remain over why a site believed to be hosted in the United States has to comply with Chinese law. Microsoft responded to requests for more information on this issue by stating that "Microsoft is a multinational business and, as such, needs to manage the reality of operating in countries around the world."
This should scare the living shit our of you. This, in effect, means that the Chinese government can enfore its laws in the Unites States through any corporation that wants to do business in China.
The irony of this is not lost on me.
MS doesn't seem to be talking about it much, but where is the line drawn here? What if it had been an American writing criticisms of the Chinese government, hosted on MSN? For crying out loud, the American government can't seem to make MS do jack shit, but Microsoft drops to its knees when the Chinese government calls. And if MS rolls over, what are the odds any one else is going to stand up?
Another bit of chill factor: "I have been talking to lots of people today, though, inside and outside of Microsoft. In every instance, they asked me to keep those conversations confidential. Why? Cause we're talking about international relations here--and the lives of employees," Scoble wrote.
Here's a tip, Scoble: when your employees working in a country are at risk of death at the hands of the local government based on some comment an exec makes, maybe it's time to consider offshoring your operations to a nation that's a bit more labor friendly.
These kinds of issues are prevalent in many companies. You can't do business with a government most US citizens are trained to think is Evil, and NOT have incidents. MS just gets a lot of press because it's the evil empire, but the same disputes about the status of Taiwan, cryptography, sales tactics, labor useage, political affiliations etc. come up here and in my last job. In the end the agreement corporationst end to reach is to bow down to their government except when US law precluded it, in the interests of the almighty buck.
The way things are set up, maybe always have been, is that corporations are OBLIGATED to maximize shareholder value, at any cost...except they can't break US laws. No US law forbids MSN behavior, to not acquiesce to China is almost certainly going to cost money, thus you must acquiesce.
If China stops pulls their money out of the US, interest rates go up. By historical standards, they're still too low. If mortgage rates go up, the speculators who have interest-only loans with adjustable rates have their payments go up. Many will default, resulting in foreclosure. The housing bubble finally pops. Baby boomers who expect to sell their houses at a profit lose their equity.
Also, the US stock market is overpriced by a factor of 2 or so, based on historic P/E ratios. There's too much money in stocks because debt yields are so low. If interest rates go up, money moves from stocks to bonds. The stock market collapses.
All this is well known. China is using it, too. The position of the Chinese government appears the People's Daily: The US must "break away from the "cultural superiority" theory, which stresses a certain set of values, because we have entered a new era featuring long-term coexistence and blending of various civilizations." That's clear enough, even though written in the rather oblique style of diplomacy.
That's why the US has to suck up to China.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They're OBLIGATED? By what???? Is there some law I'm not aware of obligating them? Granted that maximizing shareholder value is/was touted in business schools, and in the 80's was strategy of choice for managing companyies But I don't understand why anyone would suggest that companies are OBLIGATED to maximize it an any cost.
I say that any good corporation works primarily for the customers, not the shareholders. And that such a business philosophy will ultimately produce a share holder value commensurate with any of the more nefarious business philosophies.
I can sort of see being modded "Interesting," but insightful? What the hell is this? White guilt? China is a hugely repressive and opressive country and being originally a non-American from a country, which shares its border with China, I can tell you first hand that Americans are not the only way to feel this way. Just because you visited China and things looked dandy does not mean they are. Perhaps you need to visit countries like India, Nepal, or hell China as a non-tourist...
Boycott Sony
I read the speech you cited. It is absolutely wonderful and refreshing. It gives me a great deal of hope for China.
One thing I got out of his speech is that he deplores the way Chinese thought and politics is so narrow-minded. He wants the students to look to China as their homeland and then do what they should to make it better. One of the problems China has is that it is sending some of its best and brightest away to the West, only to see them never return.
I don't fault Microsoft for bending to Chinese political pressure. It's not Microsoft's fight! If I were a guest in that country, I would bow under whatever rules they had. Not because I am a wussy and I don't believe in inalienable rights, but because I am not Chinese and it's not my country so it's not my place to criticize. (Interestingly enough, this is the only reason why I believe you can justify being against the rebuilding and democratization policy in Iraq.)
So that's why Microsoft is absolutely correct to bow to political pressure. Bill Gates has a voice in his own country, trying to improve education, reform patents, and change the way government works. It's his right and duty to do this. But does Bill Gates have a voice in China? Absolutely not. It's up to those students at the university to fight that fight, and that's what Li Ao told them.
Li Ao also pointed out that when you have a moral dilemna, there is usually a good way to solve it. In this case, Microsoft is actually doing far greater for encouraging democracy by building the channel by which information can be distributed than the harm it is doing for shutting down one voice to comply with the government. It would be like telling the comfort women to not accept the money from Japan but then giving them many magnitudes more money to live their lives in peace and obtain the medical help they deserve.
The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
The Yahoo case: "Nonetheless, it is reportedly customary for e-mail service and Internet access providers to transmit information to the police about their clients when shown a court order." Again entirely different. I would hope that anyone at any time called on to testify would step forward and tell the truth and not lies. Yahoo was doing it's common civic duty, even though the purposes of the trial were unjust.
The Cisco case: "The Cisco routers sold to China have the ability to block not only the main addresses for websites, but also specific sub-pages while leaving the rest of the site accessible." Yet another different matter. My own computer has the ABILITY to block websites based on content (such as gross pornography on my young children's account) - that's a tool. Big difference how I use it.
Oh, do bring it on! I love how we're trying to malign Microsoft competitors while declaring that Microsoft can do no wrong! How desperate can you get?
the whole website has been replaced with these weird heiroglyphs. wtf?
The reason girls and Windows users don't understand UNIX is because all the documentation is in Man files.
I thought this from Salon was interesting ...
for those not intereseted in RTFA, the punchline is
"Until we demand that corporations start acting like real citizens at home, it's a little hard to expect that they are going to be good guys abroad."
+1 fashionably cynical
When your own "great leader" is defending himself against charges of spying on the citizenry, holding captives indefinitely without trial, torturing prisoners, and invading sovereign nations based on fabricated evidence... you don't really have any moral high ground left to shout from. You act as though journalists are free to print whatever they want here in the United States. I beg to differ.
Microsoft is not the only one.
Numerous articles are available on Slashdot.org about Cisco selling network software to hunt down, jail or "capture and pursuade" people who dare oppose the state on the internet.
Tanks in the Square be damned all in the name of profits.
Even now we are funding a state, that does not recognize the freedoms these corporations must have to even exist. The Chinese will be the next super power in the 21st century.
I only hope they consider the "serfs" who service the Chinese economy (The West) as worthy to keep around after they have economically conquored the west.
Of course, by then the CEO and shareholders will be dead, thier shares confiscated by the Chinese government in the name of "Security of the State".
Better start learning Chinese, the world is going to be a lot different place, thanks to Cisco and Microsoft and whole host of Western companies willing to chuck it all, in the name of a share price.
Most of the time Free Trade and Capitalism bring great benefits, but it does have it is by no means perfect by appealing to some of the baser instincts of individuals.
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
As regards the government, yes. I can stand on a street corner and discuss my opinion on any subject whatsoever, with no fear of prosecution.
As regards the political correctness commissars in most large companies, certainly not. But all they can do is fire me. In Europe or Canada, the mere statement of your sincerely held beliefs on homosexuality or race relations can get you locked in prison, as I'm sure you are aware.
they are simply 'evil communists' who persecute pious religious practitioners like Falun Gong, American style 'evangelicals' and other representatives of the worst in mankind.
Wow. So you're saying that the apolitical, tai-chi-practicing mystics of Falun Gong are representatives of the "worst in mankind", and not the people who were responsible for Tienanmen? Will you defend China's destruction of Tibetan Buddhism too? Nobody as evil as that ol' devil the Dalai Lama, is there. . .
-ccm
Too much Law; not enough Order.
My thanks to Trip-Master Monkey and 28481k for ferreting out the links.
This is the type of thing that happens if your country is communist.
"Foreign policy is one of the functions of the government..."
It's all about money not functions.
When China carried less of out debt via loans, and, when our trade deficits with China were small or in the black, we had balls. So, we dictated to them about our human rights, our values and what was the "American way" of doing things. But, decades latter they finance our wars --in addition to various other pork belly spending that our leaders just cannot seem to resist voting for. So....Its simple math. We need them and their money. Our government, as well as most U.S corporations doing business in China, walk on eggshells as to not piss them off. Or they just may cut us off from borrowing our own money. Makes sense to me.
This has been another valuable and informative opinion from:
Catahoula!