China Gets over

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:33 pm

Someone explain to me why it is that China can get international cooperation to suppress free speech, yet the blatant and excessive copyright and piracy activities are allowed to occur with no equivalent constraints?

Oh and a big fuck you to Bill Gates, who is once again doing anything he can to get over on the competition.

BEIJING (AFP) - Users of Microsoft's new China-based Internet portal have been blocked from using the words "democracy", "freedom" and "human rights" in an apparent move by the US software giant to appease Beijing.

Other words that could not be used on Microsoft's free online blog service MSN Spaces include "Taiwan independence" and "demonstration".

Bloggers who enter such words or other politically charged or pornographic content are prompted with a message that reads: "This item should not contain forbidden speech such as profanity. Please enter a different word for this item".

Officials at Microsoft's Beijing offices refused to comment.

Internet sites in China are strongly urged to abide by a code of conduct and self-censor any information that could be viewed by the government as politically sensitive, pornographic or illegal.

For many Chinese websites, such content also includes news stories that the government considers unfavorable or does not want published.

New regulations issued in March now require that all China-based websites be formally registered with the government by the end of June or be shut down by Internet police.

Microsoft formed its portal joint venture with China's state-funded Shanghai Alliance Investment Ltd (SAIL) last month to launch the MSN China web portal.

Microsoft is not the only international tech company to comply with China's stringent Internet rules.

Yahoo! and Google -- the two most popular Internet search engines -- have already been criticized for cooperating with the Chinese government to censor the Internet.

The Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF) earlier said it "deplores the irresponsible policies of United States Internet firms Yahoo! and Google in bowing directly and indirectly to Chinese government demands for censorship".

It has called on the United States to apply the principles of its Global Internet Freedom Act on its private sector's activities in "some of the world's most repressive regimes".

The Global Internet Freedom Act, passed by the US House of Representatives in July 2003, aims to combat online censorship imposed by governments around the world.

In their efforts to conquer the Chinese market, Yahoo! and Google are "making compromises that directly threaten freedom of expression," RSF has said.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:42 pm

mvscal wrote:They're the biggest market on the planet.

FTFY

BTW: That doesn't make it right.

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 4:54 pm

5 billion screaming Chinamen tell me you're wrong

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:01 pm

China is the biggest potential market.

Someone explain to me why it is that China can get international cooperation to suppress free speech, yet the blatant and excessive copyright and piracy activities are allowed to occur with no equivalent constraints?

1) International cooperation? From who? Sounds like John Chinaman is working with ISP's to do this.

2) The continuing copyright and piracy violations demonstrates the impotence of the UN and international law.

3) Who and what can be done about the free flow of communication (of lack thereof) in China?

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:06 pm

DrDetroit wrote:China is the biggest potential market.

Someone explain to me why it is that China can get international cooperation to suppress free speech, yet the blatant and excessive copyright and piracy activities are allowed to occur with no equivalent constraints?
1) International cooperation? From who? Sounds like John Chinaman is working with ISP's to do this.

Bill Gates, Yahoo and Google. All US based companies, thus the use of the word "international". Don't go on anal word patrol on this one ok?

2) The continuing copyright and piracy violations demonstrates the impotence of the UN and international law.

If Gates, Yahoo and Google are capable of censoring specific words, they can certainly make inroads into websites providing access to pirated software, or perhaps they could have done the correct thing and held out on the chinese government until they started to do something about it.

3) Who and what can be done about the free flow of communication (of lack thereof) in China?

Gates, Yahoo and Google for starters.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:14 pm

Bill Gates, Yahoo and Google. All US based companies, thus the use of the word "international". Don't go on anal word patrol on this one ok?

1) You were talking about international politics, i.e., democracy, freedom of speech, international law.

2) US is not international.

If Gates, Yahoo and Google are capable of censoring specific words, they can certainly make inroads into websites providing access to pirated software, or perhaps they could have done the correct thing and held out on the chinese government until they started to do something about it.

What are you blathering about?

It's none of your business.

Besides, if this is about private individuals and companies providing internet access to the Chinese what is the comparison to the international trade laws re: copyright and piracy??

Gates, Yahoo and Google for starters.

You don't have the political guts...neither does the US government to do what it takes to ensure free trade, but you ain't got the guts to tell American investors and employees of these firms that they are going to lose revenue and jobs over this.

And until you do, shut your mouth.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:15 pm

mvscal wrote:We are the biggest market on the planet, dumbfuck.

Math not working well for you today? Or are you determined to be a nitpicking fucktard to the last?

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:18 pm

BSmack wrote:
mvscal wrote:We are the biggest market on the planet, dumbfuck.
Math not working well for you today? Or are you determined to be a nitpicking fucktard to the last?

They neither have the capital nor purchasing power that the US market or consumer has, dickhead.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:21 pm

mvscal wrote:
Mister Bushice wrote:5 billion screaming Chinamen tell me you're wrong
There are a handful of prosperous costal enclaves, but beyond that China is a third world shithole. Their numbers mean nothing.

Then why does everyone from George H.W. Bush to Bill Gates roll over on command for these fuckers?

It is because they have a billion or so potential customers ready to buy product.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:21 pm

mvscal wrote:
BSmack wrote:
mvscal wrote:We are the biggest market on the planet, dumbfuck.
Math not working well for you today? Or are you determined to be a nitpicking fucktard to the last?
11 trillion dollars, dumbfuck. That is ten times the size of China's economy.

Since you're all interested in math this morning.

You know damn well I was talking about PEOPLE.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:29 pm

mvscal wrote:No, you were clearly talking about markets not people.

Bushice got it. Why can't you?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:33 pm

mvscal wrote:
BSmack wrote:
mvscal wrote:No, you were clearly talking about markets not people.
Bushice got it. Why can't you?
Markets does not equal people.

Is that English?

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:50 pm

Bushice seemingly "got it" because he's juts as economically illiterate as you, you gibbering twat.

And how has Bush rolled over on command from the Chinese? You know, you regularly post this kind of tripe.

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 5:53 pm

DrDetroit wrote:
Bill Gates, Yahoo and Google. All US based companies, thus the use of the word "international". Don't go on anal word patrol on this one ok?
1) You were talking about international politics, i.e., democracy, freedom of speech, international law.

2) US is not international.

I was not talking about international politics. Re read my first post.

If Gates, Yahoo and Google are capable of censoring specific words, they can certainly make inroads into websites providing access to pirated software, or perhaps they could have done the correct thing and held out on the chinese government until they started to do something about it.

What are you blathering about?

It's none of your business.

Besides, if this is about private individuals and companies providing internet access to the Chinese what is the comparison to the international trade laws re: copyright and piracy??[/quote]

Gates is one of the victims. His operating systems and related software have been heavily pirated, but he's taking that hit to be the first in the door in China. He knows that if he took steps to back an enforcment of the anti piracy laws - and he would have influence in that area with all his money and all his power - he'd have to enter the chinese market on more of a level playing field later, and god forbid there be any competition.

Gates, Yahoo and Google for starters.
You don't have the political guts...neither does the US government to do what it takes to ensure free trade, but you ain't got the guts to tell American investors and employees of these firms that they are going to lose revenue and jobs over this.

#1. I don't have the pull. Guts has nothing to do with it. However, I reserve the right to discuss it at will. :)

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 6:05 pm

I was not talking about international politics. Re read my first post.

International law is not a reflection of international politics? International trade is not a product of international politics?

You were the one carping about copyright and piracy, right? Both are issues of international law/politics.

Gates is one of the victims. His operating systems and related software have been heavily pirated, but he's taking that hit to be the first in the door in China. He knows that if he took steps to back an enforcment of the anti piracy laws - and he would have influence in that area with all his money and all his power - he'd have to enter the chinese market on more of a level playing field later, and god forbid there be any competition.

I don't care about your speculation re: Microsoft's business with China.

#1. I don't have the pull. Guts has nothing to do with it. However, I reserve the right to discuss it at will.

Your discussing this is nothing more than speculating upon the motivations of others.

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 6:48 pm

I don't care about your speculation re: Microsoft's business with China.

Then don't bother responding to my posts.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:15 pm

Look at this...deleting posts, eh??

I keep responding to you because I so easily demonstrate that you're politically and economically illiterate.

Your speculation about the motives of others is the surest sign that you neither understand what is going on nor what could be done.

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:28 pm

That post of yours was a direct personal insult, nothing more.

What happened to the guy crying who was crying last week "Wah just delete the post and shut up"

Pick a fucking stance.

And by the way nearly everyone who thinks they have "bode", every time they post, usually don't. You are no exception, but responding with "I don't care what you think" Hardly qualifies.

Not that it matters. You're the only one here who tries to get over on every one every time instead of looking upon it as a discussion forum.

DrDetroit · Post by **DrDetroit** » Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:34 pm

I wasn't crying last week, dopey. I was suggesting what you could do.

Similarly here, I ain't crying. I merely noted the event and then promptly moved on, did I not?

It's funny how you consider what is whining and crying.

The essence of the matter is that I noted it and then quickly moved on.