[IP] Google's consistency
Begin forwarded message:
From: Seth Finkelstein <sethf@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: January 26, 2006 8:33:59 AM EST
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, geoff@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Google's consistency
[For IP, if worthy]
The Boston Globe points out that Google achieves the height of
hypocrisy in simultaneously fighting the COPA subpoena while caving
in to China's censorship.
While the cheap irony seems irresistible to pundits, it's hardly a
reasonable comparison:
1) Say what you will about its sorry state these days, the US
government is *far* more amenable to legal challenges than the
government of China.
2) The COPA subpoena is about one *part* (an expert's report) which is
one *part* of an overall case, where Google is not a party. China
apparently made censorship a condition of Google doing business in the
country.
The Globe article also gets it wrong, repeating the mistake about
"US Justice Department's investigation of online child pornography."
The COPA case has nothing to do with an investigation of child
pornography. It's basically about a certain type of sexual material
legal for adults but not minors and the burdens of restricting access
to it with regard to minors.
People have read all sorts of deep political significance into the
COPA subpoena, that simply isn't there. In fact, from a business
standpoint, Google's actions are far more consistent than
hypocritical. That is, they'll make a fuss if it's good PR and
relatively costless, but not make any real sacrifice. What incentive
is there for any publicly-traded company to act differently?
--
Seth Finkelstein Consulting Programmer http://sethf.com/
Infothought blog - http://sethf.com/infothought/blog/
Interview: http://sethf.com/essays/major/greplaw-interview.php
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/