Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Blocks Messenger In Five Embargoed Countries
Spooky McSpookster writes "Microsoft has turned off its Windows Live Messenger service for five countries: Cuba, Syria, Iran, Sudan, and North Korea. Users in these countries trying to log in get the following error: '810003c1: We were unable to sign you in to the .NET Messenger Service.' Why now, since this flies in the face of the Obama administration's softening stance on Cuba? This isn't the first time the US trade embargo has had questionable outcomes. US-based Syrian political activist George Ajjan created a web site promoting democracy in Syria, only to find GoDaddy blocked anyone inside Syria from seeing it. The article argues, 'Messenger is a medium for communication, and the citizens of these countries should not be punished from such a basic tool because the US has problems with their governments' policies.' What does this say for the wisdom of non-US citizens relying on US companies for their business or communication?"
Without reading the article, I would assume that M$ makes advertising money with its IM. Because of that, it might be construed that it is doing business with countries that it has no business doing business. (that was really an excuse for first post...)
What does this say for the wisdom of non-US citizens relying on US companies for their business or communication?
About the same as the wisdom of US citizens relying on US companies for their business or communication. The ones are about as likely as the others, to end up with a strange feeling on their backsides.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
They don't do what is good for "people" in general and they don't claim to do so.
This is true of every big corporation. It's probably true of any group where liability for actions are taken away.
Simple. They were using the "block country" wizard 4 years ago to do this change, but whomever was doing the blocking, accidentally pressed cancel on the last sheet. Until now, no-one noticed that those countries weren't blocked.
There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
The slashdot article writes: "What does this say for the wisdom of non-US citizens relying on US companies for their business or communication?"
It's not so much that it's a US company, but closed source product.
Microsoft activation has disabled plenty of US citizens who upgraded some components of their hardware that WGA didn't like.
And even if you buy from other companies you're not safe from US sabotage in closed source software. Remember the Soviet Oil Pipeline software bought from a Canadian firm - which had CIA-placed trojans in it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_pipeline_sabotage
If you care about your software infrastructure - make sure you have the ability to fix (or hire independent consultants to fix) your software no matter what your vendor does - whether it's something innocent like going bankrupt, or deliberately breaking your infrastructure.
I'm not a lover or hater of MS, but I know when a article is biased.
Right after the writer says "it's not clear that Microsoft was ordered to make this change, so what made the company decide that US-embargoed countries aren't worthy of Messenger? Why now?".
If it's not clear, why assume they chose? Why say they aren't worthy... clearly MS thought they were for some time. MS gets no good from blocking it, they just want users. Maybe their lawyers had been arguing with the government and finally there was a decision.
Noone knows... which means don't conclude anything. More info needed.
There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
What does this say for the wisdom of non-US citizens relying on US companies for their business or communication?
What does this say about the wisdom of anyone relying on a single provider for their business or communication? The idea of a second source isn't exactly new. If you adopt a technology from a single provider, with no interoperability, then don't be surprised when you realise that their interests are not the same as yours. If you use MSN Messenger and Facebook instead of XMPP and email then you are subject to the whims of these two companies and their legal obligations.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Is not like they will avoid them to access the service, or at least a big part of it. There are plenty of places that gives a messenger web gateway.
But closing it is a good first step. It those countries people used to have something in desktop will have to install other alternatives, maybe going out from the messenger, hotmail or even windows in big numbers, going to alternatives (i.e. google talk, and probably gmail by association).
Microsoft is a corporation, not some grand giving entity with the mission to help humanity. If they saw it more in their interests to turn this off then deal with the consequences of leaving access open, who cares. It is not MS's charter to provided uncompromising and unending access for communication to all the poor oppressed peoples in the world. Their charter is to generate profit for its owners and share holders.
Cheers.
How pointless, hopefully everyone will switch to something non commercial like Jabber and the only ones to suffer will be Microsoft.
More power to decentralised protocols like XMPP where anyone can run a server, even if all internet access is cut off to that particular country
I believe these countries have gurus who can grab open source software and end up build a versatile system. Who the hell needs Microsoft?
It could be Jabber all the way.
This reply reminds me of something one my really dumb bosses said to me one time when I was trying to fix a problem I was having in my linux instation.
"Can't you just call Linux and have them fix it?"
Like everything we use has to be centered at some big corporation somewhere...
Also communication systems like WLM enable folks trapped in tyrannical regimes to communicate with the outside world. The ability to communicate with Europeans is an important mechanism for spreading Western values -- human rights, democracies, and simple compassion -- into brutal societies.
Compare China today to China before 1980. The difference is night and day. China is freer today because trade injected numerous Western ideas into the country.
For that same reason, the economic sanctions against Burma starve its people of Western ideas.
Trade and communications are the best weapons against tyrannical regimes.
So the only way to prevent that damn thing from starting every time you even look at any MS app is to be designated part of the "Axis of Evil"? Seems worth it.
sic transit gloria mundi
Why do Cuba, North Korea and all get better security due to a lack of access to one of the biggest malware outlets on the planet and we don't?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I don't understand either the reasoning here, or why they feel that blocking web service is either desirable or required under US law. (Obviously, it's different if you want to sell something there.)
We do Internet broadcasting (in English) and have a steady audience in Iran, Syria and Sudan (the largest of these being in Iran). It's early evening right now in all three places, and people there are watching TV from the US. Seems to me that that is a good thing.
In Iran, they would actually get the localized message, "Dirka dirka Muhammed jihad"
I don't know whether to rue your comment, or the mods who moderated it "Funny". It seems like /. is giving more and more mod points away to 14 years olds these days. Is it really "funny" when the instinctive association for any Islamic country is "muhammed" and "jihad"? It's not really amusing when people in other countries put on a cowboy hat and do a Bush impersonation of Americans, and it's not really amusing when Americans do a turban/jihad/terrorist impression of Muslim countries. How the hell can there be any constructive dialogue when a large percentile of the populace is busy acting like 14 year olds?
I don't know about the other four countries but last summer I was in Iran and USA brands were ubiquitous. For example all the restaurants had either Coca Cola or Pepsi which seem to be the locals' favorite drink. "Bottled in Iran with license from Coca Cola" read the cans, in plain English. And they were less than 50c!
I was clearly on the minority when drinking the local traditional soda, dugh, made with yogurt and mint.
Some locals take offense if asked about the embargo. It hurts their national feelings. "we've been under embargo for generations and we know how to get around it".
Friends who hadn't been to Iran for several years missed the old traditional Persian cola brands. Apparently Persicola and Zam Zam tasted much better than the USA brands. But locals didn't remember when the change had happened.
Similarly local olive and olive oil brands had been replaced with European counterparts. Last news I hear from Iran is that some clerics are getting around the import tariffs and illegally importing cheap Malaysian fruits which are driving local farmers to bankruptcy.
A few years ago the supreme leader abolished an article in the constitution which prevented the government from privatizing core state services. Now Ahmadinejad is eliminating the subsidies for bread, electricity, and gas.
Recently the Iranian government sounds more like the Bush neocon administration than a revolutionary socialist one.
I know that the embargo of Internet services are different to get around from the embargo of physical goods, but many people in Iran already use a VPN and browse with a foreign IP, to get pass the Iranian censorship.
As an individual who currently resides in Syria, I find this simply absurd, but the reason isn't simply Embargoes, it happens to be most embargoed countries do not implement copyright laws pertaining to US (and most non-US) company products. Some might have the spiteful reaction, 'well then they shouldn't be provided any services', while the reason for these companies not getting any copyright rights, is the fact they don't have official representation in these countries for the same reason the embargoes exist, politics.
This brings us to the main reason some services have been denied to the aforementioned countries, Revenue, now because nationals (and residents) of these countries do not abide by global copyright laws, almost all services provided to these countries are either the free in nature, or in the case of non-online products (e.g Windows XP) piracy is the norm.
So as some of you mentioned, its all about politics, what we here see, is a sign that the political status of these countries as embargoed countries, won't be changing any time soon. And the reason is simply, Revenue.
Ah! The typical open source supporter: instead of just admitting we can't meet your need, we'll just pretend your need doesn't exist.
Comment of the year
Don't bother. A quick Google search shows this as Linus Torvald's work number. It also shows his web page where he says "If you're looking for Linux information, you'll find more of it somewhere else, because I'm hopeless when it comes to documentation."
They don't speak Arabic in Iran, you fool.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
The right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing in our government.
Letting these countries use IM would seem to be an excellent way for our intelligence services to keep tabs on their communications (assuming they're stupid enough to use a system based in the USA).
Have gnu, will travel.
Good point- money...
Is it possible that Microsoft does not sell their products in those countries, therefore anyone using their software is using a pirated version?
If so, then this could be a business plan- not a censorship issue.
No reason to lie.
I don't think that MS really wants to lose tons of users, because I am from Syria and switching the country in my profile re-granted my access to the Messenger service.
Your Ad here
The Export Administration Act (EAA) prohibits export of crypto to (dun dun dunnnn) Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria. Presumably windows messenger has some kind of crypto in it so Microsoft is blocking them to somehow cover their asses legally.
(I'm a buddhist by the way, posting AC for patriotic Americans with mod points)
How funny! A Buddhist trying to skirt around karma! You should know better.
No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
Well Islam is the official religion of Iran, so the Muhammad part is right. The Jihad have quite a few supports from Iran, and no doubt get quite a bit of money from there, so that is probably not too far off. Besides, it was a joke... jokes mix reality with fantasy in a way that makes it comical.
I'll just say what I feel... if Muslims really *really* didn't like Jihad and Hamas, they would eventually lose some power. But somehow these people are getting money, guns, bombs and training. It really doesn't seem that the Muslim community as a whole *really* wants them to stop.
Now as far as cowboy hats and southern accents to impersonate Americans... they are probably attempting to portray stupidity. The part of the country you live in may not wear Wranglers and cowboy hats, but trust me, there are plenty of idiots in every corner of America.
No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
Why stop there? I'd love Microsoft to block Messenger in Australia, too.
I am a member of the Lunar embassy to Earth and even we have MS products (legal and all of course, at least based on lunar law). They are not localised yet so in the mean time we use the Earth time zone and settings. Annoying but until there's more of us, they wont add a lunatic locale.
Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.