« It's Black Hat Week | Main | Borat vs. the Internet: Privacy and Security Links for 1 August, 2007 »
July 31, 2007
Did Yahoo! Know More About Chinese Dissident Cases?
Yahoo! apparently knew more than it has previously admitted regarding the nature of the cases it was dealing with when Chinese authorities asked for information used to put away dissidents.
Rebecca MacKinnon has been closely following Yahoo!'s willingness to cough up user information that aids the Chinese government's dissident repression, so her latest update on the matter is a useful brief on the latest developments as well as a link feast for anyone needing to play catchup.
After providing the summary, she offers some interesting thoughts:
I don't think it is meaningless to push companies like Yahoo! to be more mindful of the human rights situations they will face before they decide whether or not to open a particular product or service in any given market. There is a reason Microsoft never introduced a localized Chinese Hotmail and why Google hasn't introduced a local Chinese Gmail. Because they don't want Shi Taos and Wang Xiaonings on their hands. Companies can make choices about how they engage in a market and what services are appropriate given the political situation.
While I agree that companies should be pushed to consider the human rights consequences of their dealings, I think it's inaccurate to say China's odious human rights practices are "why Google hasn't introduced a local Chinese Gmail."
Google couldn't introduce a local Chinese Gmail because it wasn't licensed to do so. In late June, however, it did get a license that expanded its ability to introduce Internet content it couldn't previously, including, according to a WSJ report that's now locked up, Gmail. And it got that license after failed attempts to create local (to China) proxy companies to circumvent China's license requirements for foreigners. So, at least according to the WSJ, Gmail has not been unavailable in China for want of effort on Google's part.
Getting that license doesn't put Google on the hook or off the hook where the issue of dealing with repressive regimes is concerned. It just means that any consideration of Google's dealings in China has a new dimension. And it means the persistent narrative that Google's guiding goodness intuitively steers it away from anything more heinous than some light search censorship is weak.
Disclosure: I have strong opinions about this story and I've blogged about them elsewhere: 1 and 2. Those items are worth linking in the interests of transparency, and because there's an awesome Star Wars parable in the second one.
Posted by mhall at 11:10 AM | Add Comment
Leave a comment