8 ms·

> "China has been urging the U.S. side to respect market economy principles and international trade rules, to immediately stop stretching the concept of nationa

> "China has been urging the U.S. side to respect market economy principles and international trade rules, to immediately stop stretching the concept of national security and stop wantonly abusing state power to suppress China's tech companies," spokesman Zhai Lijian said on Tuesday in Beijing. Ironic. I don't suppose they will allow Twitter, Facebook etc in China after this.

Barrin92 5y ago
there's a difference between the US treating TikTok or WeChat differently even compared to American companies vs the fact that China just has an entirely different legal framework. Facebook or Twitter aren't banned because they're American, they're banned because they're not willing to comply with Chinese law at all, which Chinese companies themselves are subject to. Bing operates in China, as do a bunch of other large American tech firms.
- vmception 5y ago
  Chinese law is incredibly anticompetitive. These companies are willing to comply with Chinese laws but these laws just screw them so they exit the market, then the Chinese censors block access to their domain names as it is impossible that they are complying on the information side of things. Separate and nuanced issue, as you pointed out. But not complete.
  - ethanbond 5y ago
    I’m absolutely not a fan of China’s behavior here (and in many other areas), but if it’s true that these companies “exit the market,” then getting blocked by the firewall doesn’t mean anything. What they mean by “exit the market” is to still actually participate in the market but not take on any of its obligations (again, despite my own disagreement with the “obligations”)
  - Barrin92 5y ago
    >These companies are willing to comply with Chinese laws They're really not. This is why Google exited China. The reason why some American tech firms don't operate in China isn't because they can't handle regulatory compliance (they obviously can given their size and resources), they don't operate in China because complying with Chinese laws would create absolutely bad PR in the United States. Which means this is not an issue of free-trade but of internal US politics between domestic companies and the public. The United States states isn't treated unfairly, it's just for the first time experiencing what it means to not be able to enforce American standards abroad.
    - mcwhy 5y ago
      Facebook is 100% willing, zuck even sold his kid to them trying to get in.
      - jazzyjackson 5y ago
        I want to downrank this but even more I want to ask what exactly your thesis is here
        ectopod 5y ago
        FWIW, I assume the GP is referring to this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/china-s-president-xi-jinping-turns-down-mark-zuckerberg-s-request-to-name-his-unborn-child-at-white-house-dinner-a6679156.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/china-s-president-...
        jazzyjackson 5y ago
        Aha, well if Page Six says so… Thanks for the link
      - canadianfella 5y ago
        Explain
    - deleted 5y ago
- pclmulqdq 5y ago
  Chinese law is extremely hostile to foreign companies, forcing them to give up their IP and have a large operating presence in China (including a political arm of the CCP within the company). No other country is so hostile to foreigners, and international pressure should be applied to get then to change this behavior. It is antithetical to free trade and free markets. It is completely understandable that foreign companies are staying out of China, because China effectively bans them from operating unless they are local companies.
  - dumb1224 5y ago
    > ..have a large operating presence in China (including a political arm of the CCP within the company) I've never heard of this, do you have examples? I'll be happy to read about it. Normally there will be some PR/communication office under marketing sure, but I don't know what a 'political arm' could be.
    - yorwba 5y ago
      It's article 19 of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China: http://mg2.mofcom.gov.cn/article/policy/China/201910/20191002905610.shtml http://mg2.mofcom.gov.cn/article/policy/China/201910/2019100... Article 19: In a company, an organization of the Communist Party of China shall be established to carry out the activities of the party in accordance with the charter of the Communist Party of China. The company shall provide the necessary conditions for the activities of the party organization. However, I don't think think this can be filed under "hostility to foreigners", since Chinese companies are subject to the same requirements.
      - dumb1224 5y ago
        I agree. It doesn't read anything like a 'political arm' requirement. A chinese page for explanation: http://www.gongsifa.net/jieshi/gongsizhongdegongchandangzuzhi.html http://www.gongsifa.net/jieshi/gongsizhongdegongchandangzuzh... It simply means a company should allow party members to form smallest units (if >3 people) and organise events according to party rules.
    - 5y ago
- hulitu 5y ago
  > there's a difference between the US treating TikTok or WeChat differently even compared to American companies vs the fact that China just has an entirely different legal framework. This is pure propaganda. There is absolutely no difference. Both steal your data, both will cause you trouble at border control ( see obligation to give your phone for searching at US border some years ago).
  - ethanbond 5y ago
    Ah yes, overzealous intelligence agencies exist (who can be and do get sued) and borders exist, therefore there’s “absolutely no difference” between US and Chinese law. All global superpowers sometimes ban cartoon characters for hurting their leaders’ feelings! No differences. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855 The claim there is absolutely no difference is self-evidently untrue. There’s no member of the CCP who would claim such a thing. The US and China are very different places with very different cultures, which gets reflected in their respective laws.
  - nirav72 5y ago
    while I've heard of few incidents of devices being searched..I've never had any such issues where U.S CBP wanted to search my phone or laptop when entering the U.S.
angio 5y ago
Technically the companies are allowed to operate in China, but to do so they would need to follow the strict censorship and data sharing rules the Chinese government requires all companies to adopt. That's why, for example, Bing is available in China and Google not.
- gruez 5y ago
  What about the requirement for a "local partner"?
- llboston 5y ago
  > Technically the companies are allowed to operate in China So you are saying they are not blocked by the GFW?
- savant_penguin 5y ago
  My impression is that's really just a technicality though. If instead of a total ban imposed on these companies, the US imposed incredibly tough rules tailored for them but that applied to "all" foreigners that made it impossible for these companies to operate, the end result would be the same
  - angio 5y ago
    > If instead of a total ban imposed on these companies, the US imposed incredibly tough rules tailored for them but that applied to "all" foreigners that made it impossible for these companies to operate, the end result would be the same Or TikTok would change their business to operate within the limits of the new regulation, which is something that cannot happen with an outright ban. A good compromise is to do like the EU with GDPR and not ban companies directly but still require them to comply with local privacy laws if they want to access the market. Foreign companies that don't want to do it can simply block European users (effectively self-censoring themselves).
  - ectopod 5y ago
    But Chinese companies do have to comply with these rules. China cares about total surveillance more than they care about blocking foreign competitors.
refurb 5y ago
International diplomacy is not about doing what’s fair, it’s about doing what you can get away with. Talking about some principle your opponent isn’t adhering to while violating it at the same time is common place. It’s the same tactic as when China says “how dare the US criticize our actions when they have racial issues of their own”. Of course ignoring that the China human rights violation is official government policy while the US is a policy violation and clearly rejected by the population and government.
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  Well, the difference is that the US is openly addressing them while China is openly denying any wrong doing.

Barrin92 5y ago

there's a difference between the US treating TikTok or WeChat differently even compared to American companies vs the fact that China just has an entirely different legal framework. Facebook or Twitter aren't banned because they're American, they're banned because they're not willing to comply with Chinese law at all, which Chinese companies themselves are subject to. Bing operates in China, as do a bunch of other large American tech firms.

vmception 5y ago
Chinese law is incredibly anticompetitive. These companies are willing to comply with Chinese laws but these laws just screw them so they exit the market, then the Chinese censors block access to their domain names as it is impossible that they are complying on the information side of things. Separate and nuanced issue, as you pointed out. But not complete.
- ethanbond 5y ago
  I’m absolutely not a fan of China’s behavior here (and in many other areas), but if it’s true that these companies “exit the market,” then getting blocked by the firewall doesn’t mean anything. What they mean by “exit the market” is to still actually participate in the market but not take on any of its obligations (again, despite my own disagreement with the “obligations”)
- Barrin92 5y ago
  >These companies are willing to comply with Chinese laws They're really not. This is why Google exited China. The reason why some American tech firms don't operate in China isn't because they can't handle regulatory compliance (they obviously can given their size and resources), they don't operate in China because complying with Chinese laws would create absolutely bad PR in the United States. Which means this is not an issue of free-trade but of internal US politics between domestic companies and the public. The United States states isn't treated unfairly, it's just for the first time experiencing what it means to not be able to enforce American standards abroad.
  - mcwhy 5y ago
    Facebook is 100% willing, zuck even sold his kid to them trying to get in.
    - jazzyjackson 5y ago
      I want to downrank this but even more I want to ask what exactly your thesis is here
      - ectopod 5y ago
        FWIW, I assume the GP is referring to this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/china-s-president-xi-jinping-turns-down-mark-zuckerberg-s-request-to-name-his-unborn-child-at-white-house-dinner-a6679156.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/china-s-president-...
        jazzyjackson 5y ago
        Aha, well if Page Six says so… Thanks for the link
    - canadianfella 5y ago
      Explain
  - deleted 5y ago
pclmulqdq 5y ago
Chinese law is extremely hostile to foreign companies, forcing them to give up their IP and have a large operating presence in China (including a political arm of the CCP within the company). No other country is so hostile to foreigners, and international pressure should be applied to get then to change this behavior. It is antithetical to free trade and free markets. It is completely understandable that foreign companies are staying out of China, because China effectively bans them from operating unless they are local companies.
- dumb1224 5y ago
  > ..have a large operating presence in China (including a political arm of the CCP within the company) I've never heard of this, do you have examples? I'll be happy to read about it. Normally there will be some PR/communication office under marketing sure, but I don't know what a 'political arm' could be.
  - yorwba 5y ago
    It's article 19 of the Company Law of the People's Republic of China: http://mg2.mofcom.gov.cn/article/policy/China/201910/20191002905610.shtml http://mg2.mofcom.gov.cn/article/policy/China/201910/2019100... Article 19: In a company, an organization of the Communist Party of China shall be established to carry out the activities of the party in accordance with the charter of the Communist Party of China. The company shall provide the necessary conditions for the activities of the party organization. However, I don't think think this can be filed under "hostility to foreigners", since Chinese companies are subject to the same requirements.
    - dumb1224 5y ago
      I agree. It doesn't read anything like a 'political arm' requirement. A chinese page for explanation: http://www.gongsifa.net/jieshi/gongsizhongdegongchandangzuzhi.html http://www.gongsifa.net/jieshi/gongsizhongdegongchandangzuzh... It simply means a company should allow party members to form smallest units (if >3 people) and organise events according to party rules.
  - 5y ago
hulitu 5y ago
> there's a difference between the US treating TikTok or WeChat differently even compared to American companies vs the fact that China just has an entirely different legal framework. This is pure propaganda. There is absolutely no difference. Both steal your data, both will cause you trouble at border control ( see obligation to give your phone for searching at US border some years ago).
- ethanbond 5y ago
  Ah yes, overzealous intelligence agencies exist (who can be and do get sued) and borders exist, therefore there’s “absolutely no difference” between US and Chinese law. All global superpowers sometimes ban cartoon characters for hurting their leaders’ feelings! No differences. https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-40627855 The claim there is absolutely no difference is self-evidently untrue. There’s no member of the CCP who would claim such a thing. The US and China are very different places with very different cultures, which gets reflected in their respective laws.
- nirav72 5y ago
  while I've heard of few incidents of devices being searched..I've never had any such issues where U.S CBP wanted to search my phone or laptop when entering the U.S.

angio 5y ago

Technically the companies are allowed to operate in China, but to do so they would need to follow the strict censorship and data sharing rules the Chinese government requires all companies to adopt. That's why, for example, Bing is available in China and Google not.

gruez 5y ago
What about the requirement for a "local partner"?
llboston 5y ago
> Technically the companies are allowed to operate in China So you are saying they are not blocked by the GFW?
savant_penguin 5y ago
My impression is that's really just a technicality though. If instead of a total ban imposed on these companies, the US imposed incredibly tough rules tailored for them but that applied to "all" foreigners that made it impossible for these companies to operate, the end result would be the same
- angio 5y ago
  > If instead of a total ban imposed on these companies, the US imposed incredibly tough rules tailored for them but that applied to "all" foreigners that made it impossible for these companies to operate, the end result would be the same Or TikTok would change their business to operate within the limits of the new regulation, which is something that cannot happen with an outright ban. A good compromise is to do like the EU with GDPR and not ban companies directly but still require them to comply with local privacy laws if they want to access the market. Foreign companies that don't want to do it can simply block European users (effectively self-censoring themselves).
- ectopod 5y ago
  But Chinese companies do have to comply with these rules. China cares about total surveillance more than they care about blocking foreign competitors.

refurb 5y ago

International diplomacy is not about doing what’s fair, it’s about doing what you can get away with. Talking about some principle your opponent isn’t adhering to while violating it at the same time is common place. It’s the same tactic as when China says “how dare the US criticize our actions when they have racial issues of their own”. Of course ignoring that the China human rights violation is official government policy while the US is a policy violation and clearly rejected by the population and government.

systemvoltage 5y ago
Well, the difference is that the US is openly addressing them while China is openly denying any wrong doing.