Because laws are different from country to country. Of course, I share the view that it is a retarded law in this case, but it is a law nonetheless, and one tha

Because laws are different from country to country. Of course, I share the view that it is a retarded law in this case, but it is a law nonetheless, and one that Google must obey if they want to play in Australia. I believe the legal term is 'intermediary liability.' This issue has been popping up in different countries all over the world in the last few months. Most notably in China, of course, but also in India, France and Italy, where Google executives are in fact facing the possibility of jail time. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/jan/13/google-china-western-internet-freedom http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/... and http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h-40ArK-eMbvpRDJJSojvopz60Vw http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h-40ArK-e.... The role of Internet middlemen in enforcing copyright was a key legal issue in the last decade. It appears that censorship will be the analogous issue for the next decade. We seem to have reached a relatively happy middle ground with copyright—middlemen have some responsibility, but a strong form of copyright protection has proved unenforceable, forcing many industries to innovate or die. We can hope that a similar thing will happen with censorship, with oppressive governments either collapsing or being forced to allow free speech.