Why Google Is Quitting China

gogbot

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
937
Likes
119
Google will not censor.

If china is OK with that Google will stay.

Otherwise the Chinese government will have make it illegal for Google o operate in China Uncensored. Forcing Google to Leave
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
Google will not censor.

If china is OK with that Google will stay.

Otherwise the Chinese government will have make it illegal for Google o operate in China Uncensored. Forcing Google to Leave
We dont have to "make" it illegal, it is illegal according to the law.
Law has been there for a long time, which says if Google doesn't censor, it breaks the law.
If it breaks law, then it should leave. It is not like we force it to leave, it is Google forces China to take actions.
Will India allows a foreign or domestic company operate in India while it ignores and violates Indian law?
 

gogbot

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
937
Likes
119
We dont have to "make" it illegal, it is illegal according to the law.
Law has been there for a long time, which says if Google doesn't censor, it breaks the law.
If it breaks law, then it should leave. It is not like we force it to leave, it is Google forces China to take actions.
Will India allows a foreign or domestic company operate in India while it ignores and violates Indian law?
It was my understanding that Google and China has a previous special understanding between them regarding censorship.
where Google voluntarily censored it contentment.

I guess if it is law.

Then Google will have to Leave.

Will India allows a foreign or domestic company operate in India while it ignores and violates Indian law?
No, but this is a special circumstance that Google is leaving.

This is something that will shape the very identity of the web.

Weather you may approve of it or not.

The stance Google is taking is the very same that lead to the founding of the .com era.
It was meant to space where everyone gets an equal voice.

No politics here just a statement.
 
Last edited:

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
It was my understanding that Google and China has a previous special understanding between them regarding censorship.
Before Google entered into Chinese market, the laws have already been there. Other companies such as Baidu and Microsoft operates under these laws. So what speacial understanding between Google and China do we need here? Should Google be treated specially just because it is an influential company?

where Google voluntarily censored it contentment.
Law requires Google to do that, there is no such thing called "voluntarily" obey the law.

I guess if it is law.Then Google will have to Leave.
I hope it can abide by the law and stay in China to continue its business.

No, but this is a special circumstance that Google is leaving.
The circumstance here is simple, Google chooses to challenge the law of a sovereign country instead of obeying it so that it can profit more. What can justify that action?

This is something that will shape the very identity of the web.

Weather you may approve of it or not.

The stance Google is taking is the very same that lead to the founding of the .com era.
It was meant to space where everyone gets an equal voice.
Dont take Google as an angel, this "Google defying Chinese censorship" thing is just a brilliant PR work being planed by Google, all of these is just about business. Google doesn't give a SH!T about "the very identity of the web" as long it could make money in China.

So don't take it too seriously, it will make little difference to the "the very identity of the web".

And i really doubt if Google will leave China after it bargins with Chinese authority and gets whatever it wants, except immunity to censorship.

No politics here just a statement.
Understood.
 
Last edited:

gogbot

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
937
Likes
119
Dont take Google as an angel, this "Google defying Chinese censorship" thing is just a brilliant PR work being planed by Google, all of these is just about business. Google doesn't give a SH!T about "the very identity of the web" as long it could make money in China.

So don't take it too seriously, it will make little difference to the "the very identity of the web".

And i really doubt if Google will leave China after it bargins with Chinese authority and gets whatever it wants, except immunity to censorship.
No your wrong. Google was one of the few companies that always understood its users. and cared for the web community.

They always safeguarded those early 90's web ideals .

Even today the reason they still have a loyal fan base is as a result.

If all Google cared about was money they would not have done any of this stuff.
There Share price took big hit when the China Pullout was announced.

They exist to make money , that's what companies do. But these internet companies all have their own identity and values. Google is just standing up for its own.

And when i speak about eh Identity of the web here.

it is freaking important. Not only is Google the way people interact with the Internet.

Web Censorship is a core issue of the internet.

The internet is global entity, how one nation use the Internet effects other as well, by setting standards.

The internet has had to overcome a number of challenges from Companies and countries to be the free enabling and mass empowering tool it is today.

Web censorship strikes at the very heart of that foundation
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,561
Country flag
Dont take Google as an angel, this "Google defying Chinese censorship" thing is just a brilliant PR work being planed by Google, all of these is just about business. Google doesn't give a SH!T about "the very identity of the web" as long it could make money in China.
Money is the bottom line, Google sees the writing on the wall for China. With 400 million internet users it has amongst the lowest advertising revenue per user on earth. Once the stimulus runs out, it will drop since half of it comes from that source. One must give credit to Google foreseeing the fall of Chinese bubbles and actually preparing to take measures to protect themselves. Critics of Google say they have some gual to withdraw from the largest market in the world, but it really isn't that large. Consumer spending in China is so low the little population of France spends more than all 1.3 billion Chinese.
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
Armand, despite all of your BS, let me ask you a very simple question.

Hypothetically it was Google that controlled 70 percent of Chinese market instead of Baidu,

Would Google anounce its pullout from China?
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,561
Country flag
Armand, despite all of your BS, let me ask you a very simple question.
No BS Miss, just the facts.

Hypothetically it was Google that controlled 70 percent of Chinese market instead of Baidu,

Would Google anounce its pullout from China?
Of course, the total value of China's search market is only $1.46 billion; compare to France with $3.6 billion. The cost of doing business in China is going up while the profits are going down. Stimulus for ad revenues are drying up and property prices with inflation are sucking up consumer spending. The saturation of the internet has already reached its peek in China so the record growth seen the last decade will not be there. When CCP blocks your ad content and hacks your accounts there is little reason to stay with no profit in sight.
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
Hit Pause On The Evil Button: Google Assists In Arrest Of Indian Man

These stories are becoming more common as Internet companies operate under the laws of many counties.

In February A Moroccan man was arrested for pretending to be the Moroccan king’s younger brother, Prince Moulay Rachid, on Facebook. Facebook complied with Morrocca information requests about the man, leading to his arrest. The man was granted a royal pardon after his sentencing, and was out of jail by mid March.

Today we’re hearing of another arrest, this time in India. 22-year-old IT professional Rahul Krishnakumar Vaid. His crime was writing in an orkut community named “I hate Sonia Gandhi.” Sonia Gandhi is a prominent politician in India.

Vaid was charged under section 292 of Indian Penal Code and section 67 of the Information Technology Act because he created a profile and then posted content in vulgar language about Sonia Gandhi in the community.

During investigations, the cyber crime cell of Pune police communicated with Google (which owns Orkut) seeking details about the man who formed this forum and circulated the obscene content. It was known that the vulgar message about Sonia Gandhi was circulated through an email address – [email protected] . The owner of the email id Rahul Vaid was traced, using information supplied by Google, to Chakarpur in Gurgaon city of Haryana.

He was then charged under section 292 of Indian Penal Code and section 67 of the Information Technology Act because he created a profile and then posted content in vulgar language about Sonia Gandhi in the community. If he’s convicted, he can be imprisoned for up to five years and may have to pay a fine up to Rs one lakh.

This is an issue that needs to be addressed everywhere, but the hot spots right now are areas where extreme laws make what would be legitimate actions in the US or Europe into fairly serious crimes in their jurisdictions. Our companies have to decide if they’ll defy the law and take the consequences. On the upside, users will flock to them knowing their data is secure.

http://techcrunch.com/2008/05/18/hi...utton-google-assists-in-arrest-of-indian-man/


Google is just a hypocrite!
 

gogbot

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
937
Likes
119
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Google is just a hypocrite! "

How so ?

Also can anyone tell me what

section 292 of Indian Penal Code and section 67 of the Information Technology Act
are.

There are hundreds of Millions of people who are not a big fan of Sonia Ghandi.
Why did this guy get singled out.

I mean come on, We all know why MMS is the PM and not her.

I am surprised Indian Police even bother with this kind of stuff.
 
Last edited:

JAISWAL

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
1,512
Likes
1,025
sir i think it would b better for google to leave china as it is effecting its free & fare info to user motto
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,142
Likes
20,396
Country flag
Providing information of cybercrime suspects to the government is not a problem. It's the government hacking into google to source private information and source code that's pissing Google off China. It's all been discussed earlier in the thread.
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
Providing information of cybercrime suspects to the government is not a problem. It's the government hacking into google to source private information and source code that's pissing Google off China. It's all been discussed earlier in the thread.
Before you make that statement, please provide evidence first.

Did Google say it was Chinese government that hacked into its information?

And if so, did Google provide evidence to prove that?

I mean evidence provided by Google, not some kind of report by west media.

Here is the offical statement made by Google, review it!

Did google mention Chinese government was involved in these so called "mysterious" hacking? Or is it just your delusion?


Like many other well-known organizations, we face cyber attacks of varying degrees on a regular basis. In mid-December, we detected a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google. However, it soon became clear that what at first appeared to be solely a security incident–albeit a significant one–was something quite different.

First, this attack was not just on Google. As part of our investigation we have discovered that at least twenty other large companies from a wide range of businesses–including the Internet, finance, technology, media and chemical sectors–have been similarly targeted. We are currently in the process of notifying those companies, and we are also working with the relevant U.S. authorities.

Second, we have evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. Based on our investigation to date we believe their attack did not achieve that objective. Only two Gmail accounts appear to have been accessed, and that activity was limited to account information (such as the date the account was created) and subject line, rather than the content of emails themselves.

Third, as part of this investigation but independent of the attack on Google, we have discovered that the accounts of dozens of U.S.-, China- and Europe-based Gmail users who are advocates of human rights in China appear to have been routinely accessed by third parties. These accounts have not been accessed through any security breach at Google, but most likely via phishing scams or malware placed on the users’ computers.

We have already used information gained from this attack to make infrastructure and architectural improvements that enhance security for Google and for our users. In terms of individual users, we would advise people to deploy reputable anti-virus and anti-spyware programs on their computers, to install patches for their operating systems and to update their web browsers. Always be cautious when clicking on links appearing in instant messages and emails, or when asked to share personal information like passwords online. You can read more here about our cyber-security recommendations. People wanting to learn more about these kinds of attacks can read this U.S. government report (PDF), Nart Villeneuve’s blog and this presentation on the GhostNet spying incident.

We have taken the unusual step of sharing information about these attacks with a broad audience not just because of the security and human rights implications of what we have unearthed, but also because this information goes to the heart of a much bigger global debate about freedom of speech. In the last two decades, China’s economic reform programs and its citizens’ entrepreneurial flair have lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese people out of poverty. Indeed, this great nation is at the heart of much economic progress and development in the world today.

We launched Google.cn in January 2006 in the belief that the benefits of increased access to information for people in China and a more open Internet outweighed our discomfort in agreeing to censor some results. At the time we made clear that “we will carefully monitor conditions in China, including new laws and other restrictions on our services. If we determine that we are unable to achieve the objectives outlined we will not hesitate to reconsider our approach to China.”

These attacks and the surveillance they have uncovered–combined with the attempts over the past year to further limit free speech on the web–have led us to conclude that we should review the feasibility of our business operations in China. We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China.

The decision to review our business operations in China has been incredibly hard, and we know that it will have potentially far-reaching consequences. We want to make clear that this move was driven by our executives in the United States, without the knowledge or involvement of our employees in China who have worked incredibly hard to make Google.cn the success it is today. We are committed to working responsibly to resolve the very difficult issues raised.

Posted by David Drummond, SVP, Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer
 
Last edited:

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,142
Likes
20,396
Country flag
Before you make that statement, please provide evidence first.

Did Google say it was Chinese government that hacked into its information?

And if so, did Google provide evidence to prove that?

I mean evidence provided by Google, not some kind of report by west media.

Here is the offical statement made by Google, review it!

Did google mention Chinese government was involved in these so called "mysterious" hacking? Or is it just your delusion?
Before I provide the evidence, get rid of this dogma that "western media is always wrong or anti-china". This case also involves a western company (Google), and so the western media is just as plausible as China's own state-controlled media.

Now, as for this being a intrusion of Google's intellectual property:

Google China hackers stole source code: researcher
The hackers behind the attacks on Google Inc and dozens of other companies operating in China stole valuable computer source code by breaking into the personal computers of employees with privileged access, a security firm said on Wednesday.

The hackers targeted a small number of employees who controlled source code management systems, which handle the myriad changes that developers make as they write software, said George Kurtz, chief technology officer at anti-virus software maker McAfee Inc.

The details from McAfee show how the breach of just a single PC at a large corporation can have widespread repercussions across the broader business.

Google said in January that it had detected a cyber attack originating from China on its corporate infrastructure that resulted in the theft of its intellectual property.

Google said more than 20 other companies had been infiltrated, and cited the attack, as well as Chinese Web censorship practices, as reasons for the company to consider pulling out of China.


The Chinese government has said that Google's claim that it was attacked by hackers based in China was "groundless." Kurtz said on Wednesday that he believes that the hackers, who have not been apprehended, broke through the defenses of at least 30 companies, and perhaps as many as 100.


He said the common link in several of the cases that McAfee reviewed is that the hackers used source code management software from privately held Perforce Software Inc, whose customers include Google and many other large corporations.


"It is very easy to compromise the systems," Kurtz said. Perforce President Christopher Seiwald said McAfee performed its analysis on a version of the Alameda, California-based company's software that had many of its security settings disabled.


Customers typically enable those settings, he said. Kurtz said the hackers succeeded in stealing source code from several of their victims. The attackers also had an opportunity to change the source code without the companies' knowledge, perhaps adding functions so the hackers could later secretly spy on computers running that software, Kurtz said.


But investigators have yet to uncover any evidence that suggests that they made such changes, he said. McAfee, the world's No. 2 security software maker, has spent the past few months investigating the attacks.


It declined to identify its clients. Other makers of source code management programs include International Business Machines Corp, Microsoft Corp and privately held Serena Software Inc.

Source
And about it being state-sponsored:

http://www.businessinsider.com/goog...-helped-chinese-government-hack-google-2010-1
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
Before I provide the evidence, get rid of this dogma that "western media is always wrong or anti-china". This case also involves a western company (Google), and so the western media is just as plausible as China's own state-controlled media.
The problem here is, are you ready to get rid of this dogma that "chinese media is always wrong"?

Why choose west media only as your source while this case also involves China?


Now, as for this being a intrusion of Google's intellectual property:

And about it being state-sponsored:

http://www.businessinsider.com/goog...-helped-chinese-government-hack-google-2010-1
I am not surprised you present me a report as a "hard" evidence to convince me that chinese government is involved in these myterious "hackings", alghouth the existence of these "hackings" have never been proved yet.

Despite of that, let us look at the report which has been seen as a proof by you.

the title of the report is
Google China Employees May Have Helped Chinese Government Hack Google
.

and some quote of the report
Google is investigating whether any of its employees in China helped parties -- presumably, the Chinese government -- attack Google's infrastructure last month
Your english is much better than mine, so you tell me what the words "may" and "presumably" mean in this case. Even the report itself is not sure about that, nevertheless the report has still been released, which is very typical of foreign media. But it always can win trust from people like you.
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
Google and China: Silicon Valley Is No Longer King

The furor surrounding Google's bombshell announcement that it was contemplating withdrawing from business in China has centered on long-simmering issues of privacy, government control, and censorship. Google, a company whose DNA dictates that it "do no harm," is particularly well-cast in the role of defender of western values of freedom of expression and open access to information against a Chinese system that brooks no political dissent and reserves the right to forcibly prevent certain types of information ranging from political expression to porn.

But there is another story here, more prosaic but no less important to the future arc of global business and the global balance of power. Google has not been doing all that well in China, as many have noted in recent days, badly trailing the domestic Chinese search company Baidu. But it isn't just that Google has struggled. All of the New Economy western companies in the media and information business have failed to establish themselves in China. Before Google, eBay and Yahoo both made investments of years and millions upon millions of dollars to tap the fast-growing Internet generation in China, and like Google, they could not gain traction. Both companies ended up pulling the plug on their China ventures, with eBay losing out to domestic Chinese auction company Taobao, and Yahoo ceding its operations for an ownership stake in Alibaba.com (which also controls Taobao).
(See the top 10 internet blunders.)

The failure of these New Economy players in China is in stark contrast to the success of brick-and-mortar companies. Consumer stars like Nike, food franchises like Kentucky Fried Chicken, industrial giants like General Electric and United Technologies, and technology behemoths ranging from Microsoft to Intel to IBM have prospered in China. In fact, mainland China has been the most impressive growth market for hundreds of global companies for the past decade. So how did Google stumble so badly?

The rap on China's growth is that there's lots of building and selling but not much innovation. In many areas of the economy, that's true — and the same could have been said for the growth of the United States at the end of the 19th century. But in the areas of media and the Internet, it isn't. There, China has a thriving culture of thirtysomething entrepreneurs, many with U.S. work experience, who are creating home-grown franchises catering to the burgeoning world of the web in China. Baidu, the rival search engine to Google, is most in the news lately; others include web portal and entertainment companies Sina and Netease; on-line, multi-user gaming company Shanda (which recently made an acquisition of an American gaming company and plans to expand to the United States); internet and mobile applications giant Tencent; and a host of others, some public, some still in start-up mode.
(See the best business deals of 2009.)

These companies have a distinct advantage over foreign competitors because their founders and senior managers are part of the same elite class as the regulators who enforce the various and mostly unwritten rules of censorship. They have offices in Beijing, and they lobby the Chinese government through uncharted back channels and are in what amounts to a continuous dialogue about what is and what is not acceptable. This includes not only political censorship but morals — especially relating to porn and sex. Google may have hired its own cadre of Chinese executives but it — like Yahoo and eBay before — has always played catch-up to the more connected crowd of Chinese entrepreneurs and their companies.

Google and the Western media in general have effectively turned this imbroglio into a clash of morals. Perhaps. But it is also yet another symbol of the shifting balance of economic power globally. Other countries censor content, and not just rogue regimes such as the Iranian mullocracy. Web sites are blocked throughout the Persian Gulf and North Africa based on objectionable content and this hasn't created much of a furor. Other countries also engage in cyber espionage, especially Israel and of course the United States Government itself with the largest group of hackers in the world employed by the National Security Agency.

But China's efforts to censor and monitor the web represent a challenge to the uncontested hegemony of Western business and to the dominance of Silicon Valley in the world of new technologies. That story — of China's emergence and a burgeoning world of hungry entrepreneurs not willing to play second fiddle to America — is the backstory for the Google imbroglio and one that is about to assume center stage.

Zachary Karabell is the author of "Superfusion: How China and America Became One Economy and Why the World's Prosperity Depends On it" (Simon & Schuster 2009) and president of River Twice Research (www.rivertwice.com)

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1954184,00.html?xid=rss-topstories
 

tarunraju

Sanathan Pepe
Mod
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
7,142
Likes
20,396
Country flag
The problem here is, are you ready to get rid of this dogma that "chinese media is always wrong"?

Why choose west media only as your source while this case also involves China?

I am not surprised you present me a report as a "hard" evidence to convince me that chinese government is involved in these myterious "hackings", alghouth the existence of these "hackings" have never been proved yet.

Despite of that, let us look at the report which has been seen as a proof by you.

the title of the report is
.

and some quote of the report


Your english is much better than mine, so you tell me what the words "may" and "presumably" mean in this case. Even the report itself is not sure about that, nevertheless the report has still been released, which is very typical of foreign media. But it always can win trust from people like you.
I have already factored China's case that everything that operates in China needs to follow its law. That said I'm arguing on the reasons behind Google leaving China. And hence I'll use Google's case, which is that China's "censorship" is not just censorship in the sense of the word (blocking public content, to which Google has no problem), it's problem is that China is intruding into its mail servers thereby compromising mail of not only Gmail users from China, but around the world (since it's a global system). This will take a toll on Google worldwide, if it sticks to China's methods of censorship. Hence it's decided to dump China. Apart from intrusion into mail, the attacks were also aimed at examining Google's source codes, which are vital intellectual property which Google simply cannot afford to let get compromised not even at the expense of its China operations.

With such news, nobody is going to use words such as "certainly, did, has, done, definitely, etc", since Google has not come out with its own statement. Hence using words such as "presumably, may" do not affect the plausibility of those reports in any way, especially when they're coming from reputed sections of the media.
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,561
Country flag
Who says Google hasn't been doing well? They buried Alibaba/Yahoo and taken market shares from Baidu. They grew 3% in the last quarter. They have only been there 4 years and control a third of the market. Baidu has been there 10 years and holds support of the government who makes life difficult for Google. There isn't any money in China, end all reason everyone leaves.
 

nimo_cn

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
4,001
Likes
820
Country flag
I have already factored China's case that everything that operates in China needs to follow its law. That said I'm arguing on the reasons behind Google leaving China. And hence I'll use Google's case, which is that China's "censorship" is not just censorship in the sense of the word (blocking public content, to which Google has no problem), it's problem is that China is intruding into its mail servers thereby compromising mail of not only Gmail users from China, but around the world (since it's a global system). This will take a toll on Google worldwide, if it sticks to China's methods of censorship. Hence it's decided to dump China. Apart from intrusion into mail, the attacks were also aimed at examining Google's source codes, which are vital intellectual property which Google simply cannot afford to let get compromised not even at the expense of its China operations.


First, all of your arguement is based on the hypothesis that these hackings to Gmail did exist and came from China, which have not been proved yet, but i am not going to rebut that.

Second, hacking into Google's mail service is not part of Chinese censorship. On the contrary, such behavior is illegal in China and will be punished by law if be reported.

Third, which is also the most important one, before Google provide evidence showing Chinese government is involved in these hackings, it is an irresponsible behavior to make accusation that Chinese govenment is related to these mysterious hackings.

With such news, nobody is going to use words such as "certainly, did, has, done, definitely, etc", since Google has not come out with its own statement. Hence using words such as "presumably, may" do not affect the plausibility of those reports in any way, especially when they're coming from reputed sections of the media.
Since there is not further statement from Google on this issue, shouldn't they just shut up?

Do you think it is appropriate for media to come out with such a groundless report?

And do you think it is appropriate to take such report as evidence?
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,813
Likes
6,561
Country flag
Chinese government is responsible for hacking Gmail and Google client code. CCP won't investigate because they know very well who did it. They did it.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top