Slashdot Mirror


Congressman Quizzes Net Companies on Shame

mjdroner writes "Cnet has a transcript of the House of Representatives hearing on net censorship with Google, Microsoft, Cisco, and Yahoo reps. At one point, Rep. Tom Lantos asks if Microsoft is ashamed of their actions in China. Microsoft: 'We comply with legally binding orders whether it's here in the U.S. or China.' Lantos: 'Well, IBM complied with legal orders when they cooperated with Nazi Germany. Those were legal orders under the Nazi German system.'"

5 of 459 comments (clear)

  1. What about search history? by ptbarnett · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Google: We don't offer a service that puts anyone in that situation, and the best way we honor their situation is to ensure that we are not associated with a similar situation. We don't offer products that would put us in a position of putting people like that in danger.

    Does Google maintain the same history of keyword searches by IP and by "cookie" at google.cn? If so, what are they going to do when the Chinese government demands they provide that information?

    It's not hard to imagine a situation where that information would put a Chinese Google user in danger.

  2. Heard it by BenjyD · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I listened to some of this on the Today programme (Radio 4) in the UK and the Microsoft guy sounded *really* nervous when they bought up the IBM/Germany analogy. It sounded like the similarity really hadn't occurred to him before. Really cheered me up on a cold morning.

  3. Re:Anne Frank by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Interesting
    They were asked if they would have done the same if the Nazi's asked them the location of Anne frank.

    Of course they would have, if there was a profit in it. What Anne Frank was doing was illegal (Reich Criminal Code section 1775B: Breathing while Jewish), and if Yahoo wanted to do business in Germany at the time then they would certainly have had to comply with the demands of the lawfully appointed Gestapo. Not to do so would require them to forego the potential revenues to be had in Germany, which would clearly mean a failure to maximise shareholder value.

    They're corporations. They're pure Lawful Evil by definition.

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  4. Re:Anne Frank by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Not evil. Amoral.

    Really? I quote:

    "A lawful evil character methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He's comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He is loath to break promises, and is therefore very cautious about giving his word unless a bargain is clearly in his favour."

    Sounds pretty much like a typical corporation to me.

    It continues:

    "Many lawful evil characters use society and its laws for selfish advantages, exploiting the letter of the law over its spirit whenever it best suits their interests."

    Now, tell me that's not Microsoft all over.

    (quotations from Wikipedia, although presumably originating in D&D sourcebooks - I recognise the text from NWN :-)

    --
    Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  5. Re:Interesting by PinkyDead · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was hoping somebody else would kick this obvious irony straight in there and the tone of the replies was to be expected.

    After the recent UN Human Rights condemnation of the Guantanamo prison camp, I was a bit shocked by the allusion to the 10 year prisoner when there are prisoners in Guantanamo for nearly 5 years without trial.

    The problem that I have with this is in China the 10-year prisoner is incarcertated legally according to Chinese law (even if you don't agree with thoses laws), the terrorist suspects in Guantanamo are not there legally according to American law.

    Fine, if they are terrorists, try them and lock them up or execute them, if that's what you want to do - but it is pure hypocrisy to complain about China acting under its own laws while having a blatant disregard for your own laws and the right to just and fair treatment under them.

    It's do as I say, not as I do.

    I can see where Tom Lantos is coming from with his background, and I like a good Microsoft roasting as much as the next man, but as a representive of the government of the United States, I wonder is he ashamed?

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!