backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 25 comment(s) - last by murphyslabrat.. on Aug 8 at 10:20 AM

Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft say the code of conduct will be ready later this year

Microsoft and Yahoo might not be able to agree on anything concerning a buyout of Yahoo's search service, but there is one thing the two companies can agree on -- a code of conduct for dealing with China is needed.

Microsoft, Yahoo, and search industry leader Google have joined together to draft a code of conduct for dealing with China and other countries that restrict internet liberties. The three firms say that the agreement between them is voluntary and that the core principals will be announced later this year.

Congress has been putting pressure on the search giants after the possibility of China forcing the search engines to turn over data from internet users at the Olympics -- including athletes, journalists, and visitors -- to the government was raised leading up to the 2008 summer games.

The Chinese government used information including emails, log-on history, and IP addresses given to it by Yahoo to jail Shi Tao -- a Chinese dissident -- in November of 2007. Microsoft's Pamela S. Pressman, corporate vice president for global affairs, told eWeek that over the next few months work on the initiative would be finalized and the companies would put the organizational commitments in place to implement the code of conduct.

Pressman wrote, "We anticipate a more detailed public announcement to launch the initiative sometime this fall."

According to eWeek, Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo revealed the basics of the code of conduct to Senators Dick Durbin and Tom Coburn after the Senators wrote a letter to the three search firms in July asking for an update.

Yahoo VP and deputy general counsel Michael Samway wrote in a reply to the Senators, "As you made clear in your letter, events around the world make a code of conduct not just ideal, but essential, as companies and others work to ensure the protection of basic human rights for citizens across the globe."



Comments     Threshold


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

Just China?
By masher2 (blog) on 8/6/2008 5:09:49 PM , Rating: 4
> "a code of conduct for dealing with China and other countries that restrict internet liberties"

Will they include European nations in that list? Germany, France, and several others have draconian restrictions on sites which they consider to incite ethnic or racial hatred, ones which denying the Holocaust (even to the point of simply disputing the official death toll), displaying Nazi symbols, propound ideas considered to be part of national socialism, or many other areas.




RE: Just China?
By saiga6360 on 8/6/2008 5:27:47 PM , Rating: 3
And while we are at it, let's have a Code of Conduct for Big Business. One that says don't spam me, use/sell my information without my knowledge and consent, etc.


RE: Just China?
By Screwballl on 8/7/2008 2:17:55 PM , Rating: 2
We need a Code of Conduct for internet services period.
If a person chooses to not receive spam, ALL spammers and companies should honor this. If not they can be shut down by any government body.
Information should flow freely and any company found tampering with legal consumer traffic (such as Comcast) should be subject to heavy penalties and fines as well as partial refunds for any customer that had its traffic tampered with.
Also add in updates to proper fair-use media such as videos, music and so on. If I buy a song from amazon.com with no DRM or Watermark, I cannot have my devices confiscated at the border for so-called "illegal" content.
Sompletely shut down companies such as RIAA and MPAA and make the media companies handle their own royalties and legal adventures.
At the same time, impose heavier fines on those found with shared illegal media "without a reasonable doubt". Make sure the IP, MAC address of all network devices used, IPv6 (if applicable) and computer ID matches the recorded offense records (or force all media of any sort to become public domain/Creative Commons license within 2 years of being released).


RE: Just China?
By murphyslabrat on 8/8/2008 10:20:17 AM , Rating: 2
one question: why?

Oh, sure, we'd all love it if media become public domain after two years...except for anyone who produces said goods? And shutting down the RIAA and MPAA? These people conglomerates aren't forcing artists and studios into the mix, they are just offering services at a ridiculous fee...one that they appear to be willing to part with.

And spam? are you kidding me? You have three things: a spam filter, an email block-list, and the common sense to determine that you don't give your e-mail address to just anyone.

Who lets these people on the internet, anyway.


RE: Just China?
By ajfink on 8/6/2008 6:01:00 PM , Rating: 3
Good call, Masher. I agree that some of the censoring that European nations do in the name of political correctness and propriety stifles free speech. Yes, people who deny the Holocaust or dispute certain events are blithering idiots (Ahmadinejad on the phone for you, sir). But these people actually get thrown in prison for their views if they set foot in some European states. Just a little back-asswards if you ask me. To a lesser degree, yes, many things are blocked by European telecomms by law. Silly.


RE: Just China?
By Gul Westfale on 8/6/2008 10:54:04 PM , Rating: 2
as a german living in canada i can only agree that censoring holocaust deniers is ridiculous. it is much better to have an open discussion about things than to simply deny or ignore the existence of an opposing point of view. if you do not exchange ideas then you may never evolve.
that is precisely why fanatics/extremists are so boneheaded, because they censor themselves by choosing what they see/hear/believe so that it fits in with their limited worldview.

in china it's a bit different of course in that the role of human rights abuser is played not by small groups of social outcasts but rather by the government itself. giving the population the tools to learn for themselves how the rest of us live, or to see how things could be different if they were allowed free elections, healthcare, better access to education etc etc then things would get rather uncomfortable for those in power.
quite why MS/yahoo/google want to participate in the continued oppression of these people is beyond me... because that is what they are doing. they are not sitting idly by, they are participating in this. is the almighty dollar that important to them?

ah well. i guess finding an alternative to hotmail and google is only a few mouseclicks away, and i still haven't figured out what yahoo was ever good for...


RE: Just China?
By kickwormjoe on 8/7/2008 11:43:13 AM , Rating: 3
are you kidding? yahoo! maps.

wait......i just made a right, and then a u-turn. couldn't i have just made a left?


RE: Just China?
By omnicronx on 8/7/2008 9:27:37 AM , Rating: 2
Um just because these sites are blocked or banned, does that mean that this people are being arrested?.. I don't think so.. There is a BIG difference between having your tainted point of view blocked from the public and being arrested for it. (especially when you look at the reasons that Chinese citizens are being arrested for.. far less than antisemitism.)

What possible reason could China have for screening Olympic reporters and athletes anyways?.. to screen the news of course.. My view is that if a nation wishes to host the Olympics, all journalists should be treated like foreign diplomats. It should not be up to the host nation as to what journalists may or may not write. If they do not agree, then they have no place hosting an event such as the Olympics in the first place. This should count for a lot when picking a host city and should be part of the bidding process.


RE: Just China?
By batatadoida on 8/7/2008 1:58:51 PM , Rating: 2
Regarding censorship in Europe of Nazi symbols/websites, I would like to say that most americans don't understand european politics. It is not possible to advocate the same level of freedom of speech in Europa as in the states. Why? Because in europe this has serious consequences, namely, allowing the growth of extreme right wing movements, characterized by racism, agressive nationalism, etc. If these tendencies are not curbed the social/political consequences could be enormous. I mean hate crimes (like recently against jews in france), disputes among states (like recently between Romania and Italy because of gypsy immigrants). Furthermore, the struggling european union could be weakened further by these events. So, for europe, it makes sense to have some degree censorship, although in principle I am completely against it. The states have a much more stable political system that allows for near absolute freedom of speech. Europe does not have that luxury. We have both extreme and right wing movements lurking for an opportunity to cause mess.


RE: Just China?
By Ammohunt on 8/7/2008 2:47:49 PM , Rating: 2
Thats a dumb argument the best way to fight any type of extreme views is with better ideas, more acurate and complete information. Right or Left the solution to extremism is NO to censorship don't beleive me? Take a good look at the Saudi's to see the end result of censorship.


RE: Just China?
By batatadoida on 8/7/2008 4:13:41 PM , Rating: 3
First of all, please explain why you are comparing europe to saudi arabia. That is a fundamentally flawed comparision, because the foundations of european societies have nothing similar to Saudi Arabia... Regarding the use of ideas and more accurate and complete information, you are assuming that people will chose a linear path to truth or to some inevitable conclusion. However, I am sad to inform, conclusions can be whatever you wish them to be. Regardless of how much information you spread out, that does not mean it will affect people's interpretation on it or their view of the world... On the contrary, there is a tendency to adjust new challenges to pre-existing opinions instead of embracing the new idea or whatever you want to call it. That is why social change tends to be so slow and happen over a period of decades and not overnight.
But the point is censorship. Yes, in Europe, extreme political views are censored, but we can see naked bodies in TV. In the States, nudity is a taboo for the general public, while you can express the most radical political opinions. Point is, there is always some higher value justifying mild degrees of censorship. In this case, it's political stability for europe and preservation of human rights and, in case of the states, the protection of a certain level of morality.
I would like to make clear that censorship of nazi symbols in europe, for instance, does not hinder people discussing it. It is in fact a highly discussed topic both in media and academia. You're just not allowed to go on to the street with a nazi flag because that constitutes a statement that is deeply opposed to the humanist foundations of contemporary europe. Therefore, it is banned.
It is also banned because such things caused genocide as well as the destruction of most of the continent.


RE: Just China?
By Ammohunt on 8/7/2008 2:51:32 PM , Rating: 2
Not to mention why aren't leftist extremists censored in Europe? seems that if they were the entire EU would be better off.


RE: Just China?
By batatadoida on 8/7/2008 4:20:24 PM , Rating: 2
But they are... do you follow eastern european politics? There are constant "political pogroms" to people who declare openly to be radical left!


Anything but a disaster?
By androticus on 8/6/2008 6:52:31 PM , Rating: 2
How could this be anything but a disaster? This is where the illogic of dealing with repressive dictatorships arises. On one hand, it is hard to not do commerce with such a large nation. But on the other, it is immoral to help them impose their censorship--really, MS, Google, et al. should not be running their businesses there if they have to act as shills to the dictators, doing their bidding, censoring their services. The mealy-mouthed self-serving arguments of Google (and the others) to the effect that it is better for the Chinese people to get censored search than none at all, just doesn't wash.




RE: Anything but a disaster?
By theapparition on 8/6/2008 9:43:08 PM , Rating: 3
Instead of looking at companies that operate there as the "bad guys", remember, they are taking money out of chinese economy.

Perhaps you should focus on all the companies that are putting money into the Chinese economy. Chinese parts (most are cheap knock-offs) where they just copy the idea and resell. No wonder some companies have a hard time competing.
Like that shiny new iPod. Made in China.
Wii. Made in China.
Get the point? Even the manufacture of foreign designed parts in China puts money INTO the country. About time some companies take it out.

I applaud companies for doing business in China. It will lead to only one outcome.........Revolution! (<--sorry, movie reference)
A larger foreign business presence in China will lead to the people changing thier attitudes, which leads to government change.
Change in China WILL happen. It will just take time, and foreign companies will help speed that change.


RE: Anything but a disaster?
By JonnyDough on 8/7/2008 8:31:21 AM , Rating: 2
People are pretty oblivious to it, but even American automobile companies have been using foreign-made parts for decades. It was cheaper then, and it's cheaper now. To the poster above that says American software/internet should not be helping the Chinese government censor - if we didn't, someone else would. Better us than someone else who doesn't give a crap.


By theapparition on 8/8/2008 10:18:39 AM , Rating: 2
One important distinction needs to be made. To be classified as "American" car, it needs to be made of a certain percentage of American parts. So while some parts are obviously foreign, the majority of parts and labor has to be american.


Code of Conduct?
By Praze on 8/6/2008 4:52:41 PM , Rating: 1
Why wait until later this year? I've got a CoC ready for you right now!




RE: Code of Conduct?
By saiga6360 on 8/6/2008 5:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
It's called 'bending over'


By InternetGeek on 8/6/2008 8:54:11 PM , Rating: 2
Reading the article it seems they will respond to information enquiries when they come from law enforcement bodies and only when they're consistent with international agreements and if the enquiries are coordinated on a government to government basis.

If I understand that correctly, basically, Microsoft being an US company will answer to a Chinese enquiry under supervision from both governments. Which is fine by me because you it leaves the economics to the business people and the politics to the politicians.




Disgusting?
By ninus3d on 8/6/08, Rating: -1
RE: Disgusting?
By habibo on 8/6/2008 6:41:26 PM , Rating: 5
"We're not just doing this for money....We're doing it for a SHITLOAD of money!"


RE: Disgusting?
By Bender 123 on 8/6/2008 9:26:41 PM , Rating: 2
And they will secure their search data from those gvernments with a code...It will be a sequence of numbers...1-2-3-4-5. Which is weird, because thats the same number our president uses for his suitcase.


RE: Disgusting?
By dirte on 8/7/2008 10:03:24 AM , Rating: 2
LoL Spaceballs


RE: Disgusting?
By Guuts on 8/6/2008 10:02:27 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, you have it wrong.

Read the source article from eweek.com that's linked in the article, or re-read the last paragraph, which sums up the goal of the "code of conduct" pretty well.


"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere." -- Isaac Asimov














botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki