Google seeking Govn't help to fight rise of Web censorship worldwide

[Nuschler]

Although not directly related to poker, Google seeks government help to fight the rise of web censorship worldwide by asking U.S. trade officials to treat Internet restrictions as international trade barriers, similar to other hurdles to global commerce, such as tariffs.

Sounds somewhat like the WTO argument against the US Government doesn't it.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070622/ap_o...UogM5cpaLhkM3wV

[MiltonFriedman]

This is a completely hypocritical position for Google. FWIW, Google just banned gambling content from CPC paid ads. In other words, a site cannot offer dot.net play money poker, or sell online poker software or other aids OR books through a CPC Adwords campaign on Google.

It is totally content based poker ad ban, regardless of the entirely legal nature of the sites and their services.

Total F**cking hypocrites.

[meleader2]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a completely hypocritical position for Google. FWIW, Google just banned gambling content from CPC paid ads. In other words, a site cannot offer dot.net play money poker, or sell online poker software or other aids OR books through a CPC Adwords campaign on Google.

It is totally content based poker ad ban, regardless of the entirely legal nature of the sites and their services.

Total F**cking hypocrites.

[/ QUOTE ]

eff you bison bison!

[jj_frap]

I [censored] hate Google. They help Beijing censor the Internet. There's a reason why Marxists in Hong Kong back freedom while the right backs Beijing.

[75s]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a completely hypocritical position for Google. FWIW, Google just banned gambling content from CPC paid ads. In other words, a site cannot offer dot.net play money poker, or sell online poker software or other aids OR books through a CPC Adwords campaign on Google.

It is totally content based poker ad ban, regardless of the entirely legal nature of the sites and their services.

Total F**cking hypocrites.

[/ QUOTE ]

You do realize they didn't have a choice? This may have actually spurred their campaign. Get behind google.

[Legislurker]

Good read. Some reason the date on the page says 2004, but it from the last day or two. Has names of the prosecutors, etc.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/35681.html