http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/05/11/filtering-chinese-style/ Information, Law, and the Law of Information Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:32:44 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/05/11/filtering-chinese-style/comment-page-1/#comment-5177 Info/Law » Corporate Responsibility and Info/Law Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:53:16 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/05/11/filtering-chinese-style/#comment-5177 [...] Until recently, I said. Then came this and this and this, and lots more of the same sort. [...] [...] Until recently, I said. Then came this and this and this, and lots more of the same sort. [...]

]]> http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/05/11/filtering-chinese-style/comment-page-1/#comment-20 Derek Bambauer Mon, 15 May 2006 15:52:27 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/05/11/filtering-chinese-style/#comment-20 I think Microsoft's argument is that their half of a loaf is bigger than the alternatives (or perhaps it has raisins or something - this analogy is a bit strained now). Their contention seems to be that they filter / censor less than other, domestically-owned blog services, and hence they are the good guys. This is an empirical question (how much less, if at all, does MS filter MSN spaces vs. Bokee or others?) as well as a normative one (is having 10% less filtering really enough to wear the laurels of freedom's defender)? I'm with you on being suspicious of how neatly this ethical argument lines up with Microsoft's financial interests. I think Microsoft’s argument is that their half of a loaf is bigger than the alternatives (or perhaps it has raisins or something – this analogy is a bit strained now). Their contention seems to be that they filter / censor less than other, domestically-owned blog services, and hence they are the good guys. This is an empirical question (how much less, if at all, does MS filter MSN spaces vs. Bokee or others?) as well as a normative one (is having 10% less filtering really enough to wear the laurels of freedom’s defender)? I’m with you on being suspicious of how neatly this ethical argument lines up with Microsoft’s financial interests.

]]> http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/05/11/filtering-chinese-style/comment-page-1/#comment-17 comment Sun, 14 May 2006 04:23:15 +0000 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/infolaw/2006/05/11/filtering-chinese-style/#comment-17 "Half a loaf" is not necessary, because there are plenty of censored blog services in China. This is truely a bad-faith argument. What Microsoft wants is money, but it says public interest. “Half a loaf” is not necessary, because there are plenty of censored blog services in China. This is truely a bad-faith argument. What Microsoft wants is money, but it says public interest.

]]>