NYT Editorial Slams ISPs Over Online Freedom

Erris writes "The New York Times site is running an opinion piece from last weekend which lambasts Yahoo! (and other US ISPs) for cooperating with China and other repressive governments. 'Yahoo's collaboration is appalling, and Yahoo is not the only American company helping the Chinese government repress its people ... Last January, Representative Christopher Smith of New Jersey reintroduced the Global Online Freedom Act in the House. It would fine American companies that hand over information about their customers to foreign governments that suppress online dissent.'"

Comments

Re:No kidding?

[uffe_nordholm]

I think this law means the ISPs have a choice: either get fined in country X for not following the law, or get fined in USA for following the law in country X. Either way, it opens some interesting points for discussion: should anybody (person or company) really be punished for following the law of the country/state/area in which they are? If action Z is legal in country X but illegal in country Y, should I be punished in country Y for doing X in country Z? Suppose Z is "criticising the government", X is USA and Y is the Peoples Republic of China (= mainland/communist China). Should Li Wang, who lives in Beijing, be imprisoned in China after having criticised the Chinese government while on holiday in USA? And should an American business man on a short business trip to China be popped behind bars for fifteen years for speaking his mind while in USA?

It's their right to choose to cooperate

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

As a relativist, I believe it's Yahoo's right to choose whether or not to cooperate with the Chinese government. I believe it's perfectly fine for them to respect the local customs, even if we consider them repulsive over here. Corporations may be based in different countries, but they are truly international identities. They also possess no morality other than pleasing their shareholders, and I feel they have no obligation to initiate confrontation with different countries, all because they happen to be mimicking your morality where it doesn't (yet) fit. In fact, I would say they have just as much right to start censoring information in the US as they do subverting the Chinese censorship systems.

Of course, as a relativist, no-one respects my opinions. Take 'em or leave 'em.

Re:No kidding?

[wilsong]

Your X's, Y's and Z's obscure the issue by artificially limiting the choices: no business should be trading in, profiting from and ultimately supporting totalitarian states. This includes Yahoo and the Do-No-Evil Empire.

What online freedom?

[eebra82]

In Europe and the United States, we've seen the governments meddling with online freedom over and over again. For example, France is soon voting on a law that would force ISPs to shut down users who download copyrighted material. And then there's our own White House's Safe Port Act that forces financial institutions to shut down its operations to gambling sites. What's more bizarre is that some congressmen want the ISPs to regulate it; block "illegal" sites by banning the IP adresses. In Sweden they had party members who wanted ISPs to hand out IP adresses of users.

Good.

[headkase]

This is welcome in that it a step towards enforcing Universal Rights by our value system not rules to interpret of anothers. Universal Rights are something we fought hard for here and on principle alone we should not compromise them elsewhere because they aren't enlightened (from my perspective) enough yet.

You've just identified the problem

[Infonaut]

If companies doing business with the communist government in China is a problem, then forbid any company in USA to trade with China and you will have solved the problem.

Everybody knows China and America do massive trade together. Congress would rather throw stones at Yahoo!, et. al. while maintaining China's favored trade status, sending athletes to the Olympics, and doing nothing about Tibet. Frankly I think trade with China is ultimately more constructive than China-bashing, but the Congresscritters want to have it both ways.

Re:You've just identified the problem

[ScrewMaster]

The real problem now is that, even if you could convince a significant number of Americans to only "buy American" ... they couldn't do it. There's are hardly any consumer goods on sale anywhere that aren't Made in China. The masses had a chance fifteen or twenty years ago to vote with their wallets, and they did. They voted for cheap imported goods from China. We're getting exactly what we wanted: cheap imports, at the expense of domestic manufacturing and national independence. The situation is, of course, untenable and is a disaster in the making.

Good job, America. Pull out that credit card and keep on voting.