Unfortunately the price of operating a business overseas, is that you have to abide by the laws of the countries you operate in, whether you agree with them or not.

The fact that the US foreign affairs comittee is dead set against 'a wealthy American Business' abiding by the laws of the country operates in when they conflict with American ideals, is far more worrying.

> The fact that the US foreign affairs comittee is dead set against 'a wealthy American Business' abiding by the laws of the country operates in when they conflict with American ideals, is far more worrying.

Not really. After all, you say yourself that they conflict with American ideals, and we're simply saying "GTFO China" - Google needs to be slapped down too.

You don't need to abide by Chinese law when you quit operating in China.

You got it right, the last few Yahoo! articles didn't have the right.... emphasis.

That kind of logic, when expanded, would lead you to believe that it is quite OK to have the USA intelligence services torture people in other countries where this is common practice and within the law...

Its like saying, the government only has to do what the electorate wants them to do IN THEIR COUNTRY ONLY... This is far from acceptable. Obviously how one behaves at an international level affects things at a local level.

Or for businesses, its like saying child pornography is illegal in the USA, but we can legally buy children in Myanmar, or somewhere, and make films of them but only distribute them where it is legal to do so, over the internet, and its not our fault it fuels paedophilia in the USA.

It doesn't matter what the damn laws are, its just plain wrong.

It seems that Yahoo's argument of 'obeying local laws' bears more than a striking similarity to the defence of 'only obeying orders' used at the Nuremberg trials.

Is it wrong for people to expect companies to uphold what is considered a human right in their home nation (i.e. free speech) in the other countries in which they operate, or does that go out of the window once profits are threatend?

If the situation were more drastic (let's say a despotic German with a small moustache demanding the details of anyone supsected of being Jewish so that they could be rounded up and disposed of) are we saying that companies such as Yahoo should just take the Pontius Pilate approach and wash their hands of the matter?

Yahoo! is fortunate to be able to shrug its shoulders and say, Well, we have to comply with the laws in the countries where we operate."

Unfortunately, if it lied to Congress about what it knew, Yahoo! failed to comply with the laws of the United States.

It does, indeed, matter what the damn(ed) laws are.

I agree with you John. They aren't being investigated for turning over the data, they're being investigated for lying. Not that the committee won't turn it into a witch hunt about that data.

>That kind of logic, when expanded, would lead you to believe that it is quite OK to have the USA intelligence services torture people in other countries where this is common practice and within the law...

cough... cough... Guantanamo... cough :)

in all seriousness, look at this a slightly different way, if the US authorities approached Yahoo, with all the proper US legal forms, and asked them to turn over all the details they had on a "Terror Suspect" would you expect them to do it? Would you expect them to refuse until they had all the details, and then not go along with it because they don't agree with the government?

Whether or not Yahoo was right to set up in China in the first place is another matter, but once they have made that discision and set up a Chinese subsiduary. That subsiduary must abide by local laws, even if they are different from where the main company is based. Its good that they didn't just ignore local law in favour of US law where it suited them.

Standing up for what we know to be right should come ahead of profits. I'm appalled any US companies do business with China, given the ruling government's position on suppressing dissent.

Here's one of those opportunities for all the American flag waving, freedom loving, right minded people to put their money where their mouth is. Total embargo on China until they cease their brutal ways.

While I deplore China's actions against those who disagree with the Chinese government...

Let's see:

The US Government orders SWIFT (a European company) to hand over data about European citizens (in breach of European laws).

The Chinese Government orders Yahoo! (a US company) to hand over data about Chinese citizens (in breach of US laws).

Hmmm... I don't know... it looks the same to me, the only change is in the name of those involved.

<slaps head> Oh, I forgot. This must be the US government "Do as I say, not as I do" policy in action.

This is nothing at all new. Western countries have courted despotic, anti democratic, or impoverished countries for centuries where it benefited them. Whether they gained access to enormous markets, cheap (or free) labour or untapped resources they certainly prospered.

There may be some legal recourse but the fact is that any victory may end up coming in spite of the law.

The "we were just obeying the law" or "it was the way times were, back then" defense can only be run so far in the court of public opinion before it starts having real impact on the bottom line.

The congressional committee is going to be about as much use as a lit match in a snowstorm but the "dissident's" civil suit should result in a settlement. Sadly, whether it is holocaust survivors suing Swiss banks and German car makers, or Chinese suing American dot-coms the outcome will always be tailor made to produce the maximum benefit at the minimum cost from the point of view of the corporation. The victim will get his payday and it may well make him richer than his wildest dreams but moral or legal justice will get nothing.

In the end businesses will continue to engage with whomever it benefits them to, and will do so right at the bleeding edge of the law. It is their duty to their shareholders and unless their shareholders add to their responsibility a requirement for ethical and fair trading that can temper the drive for profits and growth then the corporations will continue along their path - perhaps factoring the odd lawsuit into their earnings projections.. just in case.

its not about the fact that Yahoo! gave the information to the chinese government. its the fact that while testifying under oath before this government, the executive staff of Yahoo! lied.

For his untruthful testimony, Michael Callahan should face a prison term, be stripped of his right to practice law and be barred from ever holding a position of trust within a publicly traded company for the remainder of his life.

For their part in this cover up, Yahoo! should be fined a dollar amount higher than it would be capable of recovering from, forcing the company in to bankruptcy and eventually out of business.

Though it pains me inside what has in the past and is currently taking place in china, it boils my blood that these executive think they can do what ever they like and then lie to the whom ever calls them to the mat regarding their actions.

"Unfortunately the price of operating a business overseas, is that you have to abide by the laws of the countries you operate in, whether you agree with them or not."

And who put a gun to Yahoo's collective head and said "you MUST do business in China"?

Yahoo's management, by opening a subsidiary in China in the first place, knowing full well the local legal situation (it's called "due diligence" and Yahoo has plenty of lawyers) consciously and willingly placed profit above human rights. Which is their call; it's hard for me to get upset about it tho' knowing that between Google and Facebook, Yahoo will shortly cease to exist... And good riddance. They are everything that is cheesy and lame about the Internet.

Well if any Yahoo employees were inside the USA or any electronic Media was inside or passed throught any connnection cable or network inside the USA, or any of the software involved was written inside the USA, then it falls under International commerce, which the USA has a right to control. Even if a Law was not broken the USA could prohibit Yahoo from doing business inside the USA should they decide they are Communist Sympathisers. Was the blog posted on inside China or not? If not we are talking about international law.

The Internet is very tricky when it comes to the law. The FCC sometimes gets involved. You could be charged with Wiretapping violations, and who knows what else.

It is very difficult doing business with communists. Hell they arrested people for teaching deep breathing exercises, threw them in jail, tortured them, and then sold their body parts. I know some people will have complaints about this paragraph, but it is still the truth.