Durbin bashes Yahoo, Google operations in China

Tue, 05/20/2008 - 6:26pm
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images

Looks like Sen. Dick Durbin may be taking up the flag of the late Rep. Tom Lantos when it comes to bashing the operations of tech companies in China. Ars Technica's Nate Anderson reports on today's hearing before Durbin's Judiciary subcommittee:

Yahoo, Google, and Cisco all trekked over to the Senate today to sit for an hour under the grandfatherly, but strangely stern eye of Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL). The subject was 'Internet freedom,' but this turned out to be code for 'censorship in China....' Durbin [was not] convinced, though, that multinational corporations were truly doing as much as they legally could to avoid censoring information.... After Google's Nicole Wong claimed that engagement with China was better than isolation, Durbin said that the answer reminded him of corporate arguments regarding apartheid in South Africa.

Durbin told tech executives to expect some legislation in the Senate similar to the Global Online Freedom Act, which would hold U.S. companies liable for helping foreign governments censor the Net. A recently unearthed PowerPoint presentation in which Cisco Systems executives appeared to be keen to help Chinese officials in censoring the Web (one phrase referred to "combating Falun Gong evil cult and other hostile elements") could give the bill legs.



Advertisement

 

"H.R. 275: Global Online

"H.R. 275: Global Online Freedom Act of 2007 - To promote freedom of expression on the Internet, to protect United States businesses from coercion to participate in repression by authoritarian foreign governments, and for other purposes" WOW. That sounds like a really important law. But does there exist a law protecting Americans who are being coerced to cooperate in possibly illegal things against other governments? For example, the Economic Espinage Act of 1996 only holds non-US persons to account for Industrial or Economic espionage infringement. So how does one address the many cases of US-led industrial espionage (NSA-Saudi per aircraft sales; NSA or FBI hacking into the Ministry of Trade, the FBI hacking into the Russian network to lure the two kids to Washington State to be arrested, etc), it appears that the law only flows one-way, which isn't fungible in terms of the legal balance of "Rights" vs. "Obligations". Besides that, the US intel isn't liable to criminal statute even in the U.S. So what do you propose in those two situations, i.e. when US intel tries to coerce its own citizens, or when they break non-US laws? At present, they can't be prosecuted. What do you propose as a solution? Status quo? Allowing them to do as they want? Isn't that a form of sanctioned organized crime? As for breaking foreign laws: Do our own intel sit in an ivory tower immune from judgement? How is that to affect our relations with our trading partners and allies? ____________________________________________________________ Free Trade and FDI Evangelist