3 ms·

So then I suppose Google should have just given in to the Chinese government's demands for censorship, or the US government's demands for access to private data

• buro9 13y ago
  Yes. I don't agree with either of those things, but there is a point at which globalisation comes into conflict with sovereign nations. The status of a company is one that is granted to it by a sovereign country, and sovereign countries establish through their legal and government systems how companies can act within their borders. Once you're there... yes, Google should comply to any legal request. And in fact, they do... as requests for data issued under legal order are in fact complied with. Companies are not above the law (and laws tend to exist at country level or through treaty across many countries). And if the law of a country says pay, then Google need to pay unless another law can trump it and says not to pay. There's no two ways about it, companies must comply with the laws of whatever land they operate in.
  • serge2k 13y ago
    Google has every right to present their argument to a court. This is how law works.
  • EthanHeilman 13y ago
    What gives the state's law making capacity the magical ability to trump morality and ethics? There exist laws so hideous and offensive to human dignity, that they should never be obeyed. EDITED: I am not talking about the google privacy case specifically, previous posts in this thread had widened the scope beyond this point.
    • chris_wot 13y ago
      Agreed. If you feel that you cannot obey those laws, you should cease doing business in that country.
      • EthanHeilman 13y ago
        What if that is the sole country you do business in and you are legally forbidden from closing your business (as can happen to a business that produces essential war materials)? The problem that is that companies are not above the law, but they are even less above ethics. The primary reason that we argue that companies should follow the law is ethics and when ethics and the law are in conflict ethics always trumps the law.
        • chris_wot 13y ago
          That's an extreme situation. I would disobey this law.
        • wavefunction 13y ago
          You're running a hypothetical munitions factory whose sole client is the government and you're worrying about the ethics and morality of having to comply with the laws of that country? Let's worry about the morals and ethics of operating that munitions factory before we get concerned with "unjust" laws.
    • ryguytilidie 13y ago
      Fair enough to make this argument, but I wouldn't call a fine for violating privacy laws as an example of "laws so hideous and offensive to human dignity, that they should never be obeyed." by any means...
  • finch_ 13y ago
    To be clear, I'm not saying that Google should break the law. Instead, I'm saying that it's clearly the case that there are some bad laws in the world, and that its perfectly reasonable for companies to engage in advocacy to have those laws changed, rather than just rolling over and accepting them, for example the way that American tech companies have been releasing reports on the requests for data that they receive from the government in order to raise awareness of the issue. I'm not even saying this necessarily applies to this exact situation - maybe the laws in France that Google was in violation of are good laws, in which case hopefully Google loses its appeal. It's just ridiculous to say that companies should always just do whatever government tells them to do without question.
• chris_wot 13y ago
  No. They should stop trading in such countries if they don't like the laws.
  • hatred 13y ago
    It's a bigger problem then that. Laws are not exactly straight white strings which you know everything about when you set foot on some country to begin operations. If some country takes you to task on some ridiculous convoluted third world laws ( may be I am exaggerating here ) , a company has every right to present its views in court rather then just suck it up for the sake of abiding by the law. Also, once you have set up operation in a country it is very hard to move out since it risks putting your millions of users off who have got used to your product.
    • nraynaud 13y ago
      Yeah, a third world law asking them to tell their users exactly what they will do with personal data they will send to a country that has notoriously no legal protection for them and a very active market in personal data and identity theft. In this case, having google comply to the most restrictive law of the countries they are operating in would benefit the rest of the world. They are not asked to come to work naked. They are asked to explain their users who will be able to know of their secret homosexuality or the brand of their car.
  • mildtrepidation 13y ago
    Which is true -- just like the idealistic interpretations here of the reason laws and governments exist -- but neither are really based in reality. Since "just stop doing business there" often isn't a realistic option for most businesses, big or small, you do what you can to work within the law while attempting to retain what seems to you a reasonable standard of ethics. That's a very gray position, but that's how the world is. When politics and legislation are ideal and unchanging, then you can expect corporations to consistently comply with all laws in all places. Until then, it's unreasonable to make statements like this. It is, of course, your right to do so; just don't make the mistake of believing it reflects how business and government actually work.
• nicholassmith 13y ago
  As far I remember they did self-censor for a while, then pulled services over to Hong Kong to get around the laws instead.