The request for data from Google

[CORed]

Recently Google made headlines by refusing to provide the government with information about searches conduced on its web site. Good for Google.

I wonder if this has anything to do with it.

Just my little contribution to keeping this "Google bomb" alive.

[canis582]

Drudge is very happy this afternoon that Google's shares dropped after earnings news.

Google is hated by the monied elite in this country because they do not control the company.

[Nepa]

I love Google!

[BluffTHIS!]

The funny thing, and one which shows the double standards of google, is that they won't help the US gov to find terrorists, but they will help the Chinese gov by blocking access of their citizens to websites and search terms.

[elwoodblues]

Google has a responsibility to their shareholders to drive profit. Volunteering search records to the federal government goes against this responsibility. Offering a search engine in a HUGE market in China (even with the limitations) goes toward this responsibility.

[Nepa]

[ QUOTE ]
The funny thing, and one which shows the double standards of google, is that they won't help the US gov to find terrorists, but they will help the Chinese gov by blocking access of their citizens to websites and search terms.

[/ QUOTE ]

aren't they just following the laws of both counties?

[BluffTHIS!]

Ellwood, by that same reasoning, an American company that sold electrodes, and knowing that the Chinese intended to use them for electro-shock torture of prisoners, would feel obligated to sell them anyway in order to fulfill their responsibility to shareholders to make a buck any way possible. Like the German firms that sold supplies for concentration camp death chambers to the Nazi German government.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The funny thing, and one which shows the double standards of google, is that they won't help the US gov to find terrorists, but they will help the Chinese gov by blocking access of their citizens to websites and search terms.

[/ QUOTE ]

aren't they just following the laws of both counties?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think there is a law in the U.S. that states that Google can't turn over the information the U.S. government seeks. It's a business decision by Google.

[PoBoy321]

[ QUOTE ]
Ellwood, by that same reasoning, an American company that sold electrodes, and knowing that the Chinese intended to use them for electro-shock torture of prisoners, would feel obligated to sell them anyway in order to fulfill their responsibility to shareholders to make a buck any way possible. Like the German firms that sold supplies for concentration camp death chambers to the Nazi German government.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I think that it's a completely irrelevant example.

A better example would be "In country A, you can not farm unless you use pesticide X because it prevents the growth of locust populations. In country B, you can not use pesticide X because they determined that it is detrimental to your health. So the Transnational Farming Company (TFC) doesn't use the pesticide in country B, but does use it in country A."

So is the TFC wrong for using a detrimental pesticides in country A and not controlling the locust population in country B? All they're doing is following the laws of the country they're trying to do business in.

Now, you can argue about the laws, but I don't think that you can argue about whether or not the company is wrong for obeying them.

[BluffTHIS!]

People living under repressive regimes that seek to limit their access to information aren't locusts.