backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 41 comment(s) - last by Parhel.. on Aug 25 at 1:22 PM


Rocker Sting, known for his work with The Police, is among the rockers contributing to the Free Tibet album that might have got iTunes blacklisted by China.  (Source: DailyCeleb.com)
The red giant reminds the west that it controls its internet

China is known for its aggressive online stances.  It maintains a national firewall to block pages it deems offensive.  It removes any information that calls the state into question -- say evidence that it forged its young gymnasts passports.  Those found violating its internet restrictions are often jailed. 

It has recently spied on its guests' internet connections at the Beijing Olympics according to reports.  And if U.S. military officials are to be believed, it has been committing hacking assaults against the U.S. government online.

Now China has yet again demonstrated it will not tolerate dissent on its internet networks.  On Monday China's many internet users began to notice that they were unable to download songs from the popular Apple service iTunes

Then someone noticed that was the day after Art of Peace Foundation announced the release of "Songs for Tibet," with music by Sting, Alanis Morissette, Garbage and others along with a 15-minute talk by the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan leader.  Now Michael Wohl, executive director of the New York City-based group, claims he has inside information on why iTunes has mysteriously malfunctioned on Chinese networks.

Mr. Wohl states in a phone interview, "We issued a release saying that over 40 (Olympic) athletes downloaded the album in an act of solidarity, and that's what triggered it. Then everything got blocked."

While Beijing supports internet use and contact with the outside world for business and educational purposes, it has not tolerated online material concerning Tibet.  China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology refused to comment on the iTunes prohibition.  An unnamed spokeswoman for the Ministry of Public Security said she has no information on the topic.

Apple, based in Cupertino, California, has confirmed reports that something is afoot.  Huang Yuna, an Apple spokeswoman in Beijing states, "We are aware of the logon problems but we have no comment at the moment."

She would not comment on how many of Apple's Chinese customers were affected.  The problem is widespread according to online postings.  On macfans.com.cn, a Chinese site for Apple fans, one user writes, "It seems like suspending iTunes is punishment for iTunes, but really it doesn't hurt iTunes, it hurts us."

Mr. Wohl has stated that his 20-song album was offered free-of-charge to Olympians.  He says that athletes from the United States, Canada, Britain, Spain, France and Australia all made a statement by participating in the download.  He acknowledges, "Some in Beijing did download, and I think that's what spooked the Chinese government."

He would not disclose the athletes participating, for fear of retribution by the International Olympic Committee or the Chinese government.  He says he does not believe Apple gave consent for the denial of service.  He said Apple offered no complaints about his group’s album.  He states, "They're incredibly supportive people. They wouldn't do anything like that.  They support freedom of speech and freedom of expression."

China has the world's most internet users with 253 million people online.  The U.S. is a close second with 223.1 million as of June.  The iPod is wildly popular in China, despite users having to log onto U.S. sites in order to U.S. iTunes.  There is no China-specific version of iTunes.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/2008 12:58:39 PM , Rating: 4
Germany blocks Ebay after citizen buys Nazi paraphernalia online. Certain songs are illegal there as well, for many of the same reasons.

I'm equally concerned about all forms of censorship; it seems odd to me that one is getting all the attention, and the other ignored.




RE: In other news...
By silversound on 8/22/08, Rating: -1
RE: In other news...
By Cobra Commander on 8/22/2008 1:06:20 PM , Rating: 2
Between the disproportionate populations between the countries and certain sports attraction gathering our attentions to China that I think I heard of once or twice I'm not so sure what is so terribly odd about this to you. But maybe DT should blog about the eBay topic you mention - seems reasonable to me.


RE: In other news...
By lifeblood on 8/22/2008 1:07:04 PM , Rating: 5
Because China is the hot topic of the week.

Tibet did not start a world war and murder millions of people in death camps, the Nazi's did. It's a slightly different thing. However, that being said you are still right. As distasteful as Nazi's are, censorship is wrong and probably encourages Nazi-ism by adding to the mystique. Germany and France should fight wannabe Nazi's with facts, not censorship.


RE: In other news...
By heeros1 on 8/22/2008 1:12:26 PM , Rating: 2
Do you have a link that has more information about this? because the only thing i found that was even remotely related was an article from 2002 asking one of the many states in Germany to block only two US nazi sites from being accessed.
I also can't believe that any songs would be outlawed, unless it contain pro nazi lyrics.


RE: In other news...
By The Boston Dangler on 8/22/2008 1:22:37 PM , Rating: 3
germany has strict laws relating to speech and the nazi era. the president of iran had publicly questioned (in iran) whether the holocaust took place (which is a crime in germany), and was denied entry to germany to watch the world cup.


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/2008 1:24:08 PM , Rating: 1
> "I also can't believe that any songs would be outlawed, unless it contain pro nazi lyrics."

That, or ones which are deemed to promote National Socialist ideas or philosophy, dispute the official account or death toll of the Holocaust, or ones which 'incite hatred'.


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/2008 1:29:03 PM , Rating: 1
I believe the official German term is 'Volksverhetzung', which includes "insults to human dignity" by not showing proper respect to all racial and ethnic groups, as well as anything which is considered to glorify or justify acts of the National Socialists (Nazis).


RE: In other news...
By heeros1 on 8/22/2008 1:45:10 PM , Rating: 3
Germany is very careful with anything nazi related, since it was the cause of the second World War. Any nazi gestures, or symbols are not tolerated, which is understandable, since they don't want history to repeat itslef. But it is not a taboo topic. When I attended German school, we were taught far more about WWII then I learned in American High School, we even visited a Concentration Camp (Konzentrationslager) on one of our field trips to show us how badly people had been treated.

What I was questioning in my first post was the fact that Germany was blocking ebay because of the sale of some nazi "artifacts".


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/08, Rating: 0
RE: In other news...
By heeros1 on 8/22/2008 3:57:34 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you for clarifying the comment about ebay being "blocked" by Germany (according to the provided article ebay was "pressured by public sentiment", and not by government action).

and about Government control in Germany, it's understandable that they would ban anything that would show nazi ideals in a positive light, since it was considered to be a black spot in the history of Germany. There are guaranteed to be some people who are patriotic and stupid enough to yearn for the return of an era when Germany was considered prosperous and powerful. However, in this day and age, where international relations, and business is very important, it would be very bad to have active and uncontrolled groups within the country known to harbor hatred towards specific races or religions.

It's like the KKK in the US, they're being looked down upon by most people, but there are some who believe in the ideals. If the KKK were to gain control, I would assume the first thing they would do is return to a system of slavery, which I would assume most Americans wouldn't want, and wouldn't tolerate.

now china seems to have an active information suppression, and manipulating department that makes sure they keep their people in check, which I wouldn't compare to Germany.


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/2008 5:49:15 PM , Rating: 1
> "according to the provided article ebay was "pressured by public sentiment", and not by government action..."

If you don't like that action, how about this one?
quote:
A French judge has ruled that the US Internet Service Provider Yahoo! Inc must make it impossible for French users to access sites auctioning race hate memorabilia
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/760782.stm

> " it's understandable that they would ban anything that would show nazi ideals in a positive light"

I have very little "understanding" for censorship. Every government in history which has restricted human rights thought they had good reason for it. They're always wrong.

> "It's like the KKK in the US"

The difference here is that the KKK isn't banned in the US. They're allowed to have their marches, embarrass themselves, and thereby defuse that sentiment from growing larger. All without the government needing to trample any rights.


RE: In other news...
By 67STANG on 8/22/2008 7:27:48 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
The difference here is that the KKK isn't banned in the US. They're allowed to have their marches, embarrass themselves...
You can only have the sense of embarrassment if you posses the intellect to know what you are doing is retarded.


RE: In other news...
By RjBass on 8/23/2008 7:05:23 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, awesome point.


RE: In other news...
By smitty3268 on 8/22/2008 10:51:30 PM , Rating: 2
There are plenty of reasons to find China's censorship much more offensive. Tibet never caused a holocaust, and the German laws are created by a democratically elected government by the people, while China's people don't have much say in the matter.

Still, I agree that the European laws are wrong.

In the end, it just comes down to the fact that China is viewed as a threat in the US and Europe is not. That's why you see negative stories about China where they are doing things like taking away freedoms, and the negative stories about Europe are more often about decadence or morality but not actual danger.


RE: In other news...
By Solandri on 8/23/2008 5:11:13 PM , Rating: 2
I have to agree. The Nazi philosophy was tried in the court of human history and was found devoid and illegitimate, at the cost of 70 million lives. While I personally feel anyone should be free to say whatever they want, I can totally understand why the countries which bore the brunt of those lost lives might wish to make an exception in this case and ban Nazi speech. They allowed that speech in the past and it turned out really, really, REALLY badly.

Tibet OTOH hasn't caused anywhere near as much strife or death. And the thing they're fighting for is something all people want - freedom. If China were more free, it probably wouldn't even be an issue. People would just tell the Tibetans, "Meh, you're already free. You're just a part of China now, get over it, you're not getting independence."


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/24/2008 2:40:30 PM , Rating: 1
> "The Nazi philosophy was tried in the court of human history and was found devoid and illegitimate, at the cost of 70 million lives"

70 million now, eh? I think you'll find that figure is considerably inflated. In any case, it's substantially less than those killed by the Mao and Stalin regimes. So why doesn't the Western world ban talk of socialist policies? It's less than the number of those killed in religious wars...so why not ban religion?

The largest fallacy of all is that banning discussion of Fascism does anything at all to prevent its return. It's no different than drugs....illegal, yet I can buy whatever I like on any downtown street corner in the country.


RE: In other news...
By cochy on 8/24/2008 2:52:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
70 million now, eh? I think you'll find that figure is considerably inflated.


Wikipedia tables on total death count for WW2 ~72 million. However that includes the Pacific war as well which may or may not be off-topic when considering deaths cause by Nazism.


RE: In other news...
By smitty3268 on 8/24/2008 5:28:54 PM , Rating: 3
I don't think any Americans (I'm one, by the way) can truly understand the European side of this story. We've never been truly invaded like that at least since 1812 or the civil war if you lived in the south, and we've never had to go to sleep wondering if this night was the night one of those rockets was going to hit our house and kill our family. It was a million times worse than 9/11 and it went on for years. I don't think it's surprising that the people who lived through it are very sensitive about the issue. I wouldn't be surprised if the restrictions start slipping away over the next few generations as the war fades into history.

Also, I think Mao and Stalin aren't as associated as closely with socialism as Hitler is with Nazism. There are plenty of European countries out there that lean socialist and have no plans on killing millions of their citizens. The murders are linked inextricably with Nazism as a central tenet of the philosophy.


RE: In other news...
By heeros1 on 8/22/08, Rating: 0
RE: In other news...
By porkpie on 8/23/2008 4:02:20 PM , Rating: 2
Seems like he backed it up to me. Those sour grapes taste good?


RE: In other news...
By wordsworm on 8/24/2008 6:27:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not as long as you adhere to the state-mandated viewpoint. Tibet isn't a taboo subject in China either -- as long as you don't try to promote independence.


Or... to soil your own home soil... unAmerican speeches or verbal support of that former ally which is allegedly between the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Can't be military and join protests against the government. Even elections in the past are rife with what would seem to be votes which were cast out because they were made by people of color.

Just to join the soiling party, I would love nothing better than to soil my own nation and its stint with hate speech (North of 40). I can't say as I DISAGREE with it. Maybe that's the crux of it - if you're from a certain country, unless you're a knot in the main grain, there are rules that are in place to govern speech that it might keep the peace, to make the majority happy at the expense of the few.

My point to all this is that we're all dirty and bloody to our ears in the history of our nations. It's only a matter of hate propaganda that many here participate in. Today, the target of hate is China. What is it tomorrow? It's amazing how easily it is to turn the hatred of a nation from one enemy to the next. People must have others to hate I suppose.


RE: In other news...
By 4play on 8/22/2008 2:34:25 PM , Rating: 4
Write an article about it then, you are a blogger here after all...

China gets the all attention because the Olympics are on, no big surprise there.


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/2008 2:39:49 PM , Rating: 5
Mmm, long before the Olympics, China was receiving far more criticism for its Internet censorship. I'd blog about it, but tying Germany's censorship into something appropriate for a tech site is a bit of a stretch.

Jason could probably do it, though...if he can justify a random business buying a windmill as tech news, he can do anything. :p


RE: In other news...
By 4play on 8/22/2008 2:58:52 PM , Rating: 2
If it's got anything apple related it's tech news :p


RE: In other news...
By DanoruX on 8/22/2008 3:08:14 PM , Rating: 2
An apple a day...


RE: In other news...
By glitchc on 8/24/2008 6:08:47 PM , Rating: 2
... keeps the flamers away - NOT!

Sorry.. couldn't resist.


RE: In other news...
By foolsgambit11 on 8/22/2008 5:50:52 PM , Rating: 4
Well, it's certainly a tough line to draw in any society, how to restrict free speech when it can potentially damage others. Whether Germany went to far in restricting speech promoting Nazism is certainly a moot point. (In the historical sense of the word "moot", meaning a topic up for debate - see "Entmoot")

Here are some examples of restricted speech in America:

1. Yelling fire in a crowded theater.
2. Slander.
3. Incitement to violence.

Are you very concerned about these forms of censorship? Slander seems especially apropos. If making the community believe false and malicious information about an individual is considered reprehensible, how much more important must it be to prevent the community from believing the false and malicious beliefs of Nazism? (Assuming that the characterization of Nazism as false and malicious seems fitting to you)

There are cases, I think we'd all agree, where the generally held maxim, "I do not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," does not apply. And I think we should agree that sovereign nations have a right to draw the line in a place they consider appropriate, within reasonable limits.


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/2008 6:14:38 PM , Rating: 2
> "how much more important must it be to prevent the community from believing the false and malicious beliefs of Nazism?"

Why stop there? Why not make it illegal to spread the false and malicious beliefs of Christianity? After all, look at how often religion leads to war. And let's ban Judaism as well...after all, they killed Christ. Liberalism and even Conservatism can be next. And by all means, ban Communism, Socialism, Libertarianism, and every other "ism" we can think of.

By that logic, surely China is well-justified in blocking statements on Tibetan separatism. If that took hold, obviously Tibet would rise up in arms, leading to yet another bloody conflict and civil war. Certainly their actions are more than justified here.

> "Here are some examples of restricted speech in America...Slander seems especially apropos. "

Whups! Slander isn't a crime in the US. You can slander all you wish, and you'll never be arrested. Slander a particular person, however, and they can choose to sue you for damages. That is, however, a wholly different matter than the state coming for you with guns in hand.


RE: In other news...
By foolsgambit11 on 8/22/2008 7:42:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Why not make it illegal to spread the false and malicious beliefs of Christianity?

I specifically included the statement, "within reasonable limits", to avoid slippery slope arguments such as this one.

The fact of the matter is that, while there are certain sects of all of those 'isms' you mentioned that would support violence, it cannot be said that as a whole they support violence. The same is harder to say about German National Socialism. Violence and disenfranchisement are part and parcel of the movement. That is why Germans have drawn the line on spreading Nazism.

As for China, using the criterion above, Tibetan separatism includes both violent and non-violent wings. Deciding how violent a movement must be before it should be banned is a difficult decision, and some deference should be given to the sovereignty of the nation involved. However, I personally don't think the movement is violent enough to justify restricting speech - despite Chinese accusations that they started the riots this spring - and even giving deference to the CCP's sovereignty, I can't justify the restriction.
quote:
Slander isn't a crime in the US. You can slander all you wish, and you'll never be arrested.

Touché. It's true, slander is a civil offense, not a criminal one. You won't serve time for it, and you won't have "the state coming for you with guns in hand." I apologize for the error, and I concede. My whole argument falls apart. All hail master masher! Oh, wait. I'll stand by my argument. Because the basic tenant still stands - If slander is bad, hate speech is worse. That's the justification for making hate speech a criminal act in certain jurisdictions, like most of Europe.

Furthermore, while slander isn't a criminal offense, there are things you can say in the United States that will make the state come arrest you. I dare you to say you can't wait for the next 9/11 while waiting for take-off the next time you fly, or something like that. Or just pray in an airport.

http://www.startribune.com/local/11585901.html


RE: In other news...
By masher2 (blog) on 8/22/2008 9:33:54 PM , Rating: 3
> "There are things you can say in the United States that will make the state come arrest you....just pray in an airport."

Oops again. Your link refers to 6 men who not only "prayed at an airport", but engaged in an intentional plot to arouse suspicion, in order to instigate action which they could then as grounds for a civil suit.

The so-called "Flying Imans" didn't just pray-- they refused to sit in their assigned seats, fanned out in pairs to cover the pilot cabin and exit doors, requested seat-belt extentions -- long pieces of fabric with a heavy slug of metal at one end -- though they didn't need them as none were overweight, then sat making loud remarks about how Osama bin Ladin was right, and how America needed to pay.

Worst of all, the state did not "come for and arrest" these men. They were asked to get off a flight. That's it. The same thing can happen if you wear a T-shirt with an offensive message on it, too revealing a dress, or simply forget to shower for a couple days before boarding.

Putting this forth as some extreme example of Fascist repression is utterly ridiculous.

> "However, I personally don't think the [Tibetan] movement is violent enough to justify restricting speech "

Funny, the last protest in Tibet began with hundreds of Tibetans attacking ethnic Han Chinese shops and shop owners. And given that China will certainly not allow Tibetan independence without a bloody civil war, even the 'peaceful' separatists can be claimed to be advocating violence.

I find it amusing that you can claim Germany is in the right to imprison someone simply for claiming the Holocaust death toll has been inflated for political gain, yet think China is wholly out of line for supressing those advocating Tibetan separatism.

> "Violence and disenfranchisement are part and parcel of the movement"

I could say the same thing about Socialism. Does that justify arresting people for saying socialized medicine might not be a bad idea? Or religion for that matter, the root of more organized violence than anything else in history. Certainly a government has a right to ban a practice that has resulted in so much death and suffering, eh?

Certain people believe censorship only bad if it's censoring things they personally believe in. Censor something they dislike, and suddenly they're all for it. That's a slippery slope, with nothing but disaster at the bottom of it.

No, your logic fails. Hate speech legislation is nothing but the thought police, and a trampling of human freedom and dignity. It accomplishes nothing useful, and is a stain on the record of all nations who have fallen prey to it.


RE: In other news...
By Parhel on 8/25/2008 1:22:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Hate speech legislation is nothing but the thought police, and a trampling of human freedom and dignity. It accomplishes nothing useful, and is a stain on the record of all nations who have fallen prey to it.


I think when practiced responsibly it preserves human dignity. I agree with the Germans suppressing behaviors they see as pro-Nazi and with China quashing this pro-Tibet hippie nonsense. All this anti-censorship foolishness that appears on these threads is just childish. If your life was in jeopardy, and China could protect you by simply stopping the sales of an album, I think you'd change your tune.


RE: In other news...
By saiga6360 on 8/22/2008 11:27:36 PM , Rating: 2
Who fucking cares about the Nazis? You? What's with the fascination? I don't find it offensive for Germany doing what they do, yes censorship is censorship, but these are the motherfucking Nazis!!! Go bury those assholes already!


RE: In other news...
By Sandok on 8/23/2008 4:10:45 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe because in Germany it is ILLEGAL to have anything to do with Nazis... No political party, no items, no nothing.

You see, some countries try to learn from their mistakes?


.
By vapore0n on 8/22/2008 1:04:02 PM , Rating: 5
I heard the real reason for taking ITunes offline was because they needed to give more bandwidth to WoW users.




RE: .
By Radnor on 8/22/2008 1:17:36 PM , Rating: 4
Gold Farming is a important part of their economy. That is undisputed.


RE: .
By daveinternets on 8/22/2008 1:30:07 PM , Rating: 2
True story.


What about now?
By othercents on 8/22/2008 2:48:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is no China-specific version of iTunes.

I guess there will be one soon.




RE: What about now?
By James Wood Carter on 8/22/2008 6:04:01 PM , Rating: 2
It would involve Itunes selling chinese songs/albums as well as the usual stuff they sell - which requires contracts between chinese music / film companies which might drive chinese goverment to protect its multimedia sector ... that sounds good


The truth about tibet
By The Boston Dangler on 8/22/2008 1:09:46 PM , Rating: 2
Apple should ban China
By Fnoob on 8/23/2008 9:17:44 PM , Rating: 1
- and sit back and watch as the iTunes/iPhone/iWantit deprived masses take up their chopsticks and REVOLT!




"People Don't Respect Confidentiality in This Industry" -- Sony Computer Entertainment of America President and CEO Jack Tretton














botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki