Syria, China, Iran, Bahrain and Vietnam ---- "Google products - from search and Blogger to YouTube and Google Docs - have been blocked in 25 of the 100 countries where we offer our services," says Rachel Whetstone, vice president for global communications and public affairs.
"In addition, we regularly receive government requests to restrict or remove content from our properties." Whetstone says the only material the company removes globally from search results is child pornography, some links to copyrighted material, spam, malware, and results containing sensitive personal information such as credit card numbers. "Specifically, we don’t want to engage in political censorship," she says. But it's all a different when it comes to Blogger, YouTube, and Picasa Web Albums. "For example, in Turkey, videos that insult the founder of modern Turkey, Mustafa Ataturk, are illegal. Two years ago, we were notified of such content on YouTube and blocked those videos in Turkey that violated local law," says Whetstone. "A Turkish court subsequently demanded that we block them globally, which we refused to do, arguing that Turkish law cannot apply outside Turkey." According to the OpenNet Initiative, 40 countries now actively censor the internet, compared with just a handful in 2002. Google says that even for search results, it complies with national laws in democratic countries, for example by barring pro-Nazi matierla in Germany. But Australia looks set to test the company's resolve, with the government pushing for laws to block access to all sorts of material that most would find pretty unobjectionable, such as chatrooms for gay teenagers. Read more at http://www.tgdaily.com/software-features/49433-google-blocked-in-a-quarter-of-countries#iRjrMyDjgyec4jBO.99 On Mar 12, 3:32 pm, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > > Special report on Internet surveillance, focusing on five governments and*** > * > > five companies that are Enemies of the Internet**** > > Published on Monday 11 March 2013.**** > > Printable version PrintSend this article by mail Send français**** > > http://en.rsf.org/special-report-on-internet-11-03-2013,44197.html**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ENEMIES OF THE INTERNET 2013**** > > ** ** > > Today, 12 March, World Day Against Cyber-Censorship, Reporters Without**** > > Borders is releasing a Special report on Internet surveillance, available at > **** > > surveillance.rsf.org/en. It looks at the way governments are increasingly*** > * > > using technology that monitors online activity and intercepts electronic**** > > communication in order to arrest journalists, citizen-journalists and**** > > dissidents. Around 180 netizens worldwide are currently in prison for**** > > providing news and information online.**** > > ** ** > > For this year’s “Enemies of the Internet” report, Reporters Without Borders* > *** > > has identified Five State Enemies of the Internet, five “spy” states that*** > * > > conduct systematic online surveillance that results in serious human rights* > *** > > violations. They are Syria, China, Iran, Bahrain and Vietnam. Surveillance** > ** > > in these countries targets dissidents and has grown in recent months.**** > > Cyber-attacks and intrusions, including the use of malware against**** > > dissidents and their networks, are on the increase.**** > > ** ** > > China, whose Electronic Great Wall is probably the world’s most**** > > sophisticated censorship system, has stepped up its war on the use of**** > > anonymization tools and has enlisted private-sector Internet companies to*** > * > > help monitor Internet users. Iran has taken online surveillance to a new**** > > level by developing its own national Internet, or “Halal Internet.” As**** > > regards Syria, Reporters Without Borders has obtained an unpublished**** > > document – a 1999 invitation by the Syrian Telecommunications Establishment* > *** > > to bid for a national Internet network in Syria – which shows that its**** > > Internet was designed from the outset to include extensive filtering and**** > > surveillance.**** > > ** ** > > Without advanced technology, authoritarian regimes would not be able to spy* > *** > > on their citizens. Reporters Without Borders has for the first time compiled > **** > > a list of five “Corporate Enemies of the Internet,” five private sector**** > > companies that it regards as “digital era mercenaries” because they sell**** > > products that are used by authoritarian governments to commit violations of* > *** > > human rights and freedom of information. They are Gamma, Trovicor, Hacking** > ** > > Team, Amesys and Blue Coat.**** > > ** ** > > Trovicor’s surveillance and interception products have enabled Bahrain’s**** > > royal family to spy on news providers and arrest them. In Syria, Deep Packet > **** > > Inspection products developed by Blue Coat made it possible for the regime** > ** > > to spy on dissidents and netizens throughout the country, and to arrest and* > *** > > torture them. Eagle products supplied by Amesys were discovered in the**** > > offices of Muammar Gaddafi’s secret police. Malware designed by Hacking Team > **** > > and Gamma has been used by governments to capture the passwords of**** > > journalists and netizens.**** > > ** ** > > “Online surveillance is a growing danger for journalists,**** > > citizen-journalists, bloggers and human rights defenders,” Reporters Without > **** > > Borders secretary-general Christophe Deloire said. “Regimes seeking to**** > > control news and information increasingly prefer to act discreetly. Rather** > ** > > than resort to content blocking that generates bad publicity and is early*** > * > > circumvented, they prefer subtle forms of censorship and surveillance that** > ** > > their targets are often unaware of.**** > > ** ** > > “As surveillance hardware and software provided by companies based in**** > > democratic countries is being used to commit grave human rights violations,* > *** > > and as the leaders of these countries say they condemn violations of online* > *** > > freedom of expression, it is time they took firm measures. Above all, they** > ** > > should impose strict controls on the export of digital arms to countries**** > > that flout fundamental rights.”**** > > ** ** > > Negotiations between governments already led in July 1996 to the Wassenaar** > ** > > Arrangement, which aims to promote “transparency and greater responsibility* > *** > > in transfers of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies, thus* > *** > > preventing destabilizing accumulations.” Forty countries, including France,* > *** > > Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States are nowadays party to the* > *** > > agreement.**** > > ** ** > > By demonstrating the importance of online information, the Arab Spring**** > > reinforced authoritarian governments’ understanding of the advantages of**** > > monitoring and controlling Internet data and communication. Democratic**** > > countries also seem increasingly ready to yield to the siren song of the**** > > need for surveillance and cyber-security at any cost. This is evident from** > ** > > all the potentially repressive laws and bills such as FISAA and CISPA in the > **** > > United States, the Communications Data Bill in Britain and the Wetgeving**** > > Bestrijding Cybercrime in the Netherlands.**** > > ** ** > > Reporters Without Borders has made a “digital survival kit” available on the > **** > > WeFightCensorship.org website in order to help online news providers evade** > ** > > increasingly active and intrusive surveillance.**** > > ** ** > > ==========================================**** > > (F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this > **** > > message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to* > *** > > these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed > **** > > within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with**** > > "Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976. > **** > > The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The**** > > Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain**** > > permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials* > *** > > if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,**** > > teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria* > *** > > for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies** > ** > > as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four** > ** > > criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is**** > > determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not*** > * > > substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use**** > > copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you > **** > > must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to: > **** > > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml**** > > ** ** > > THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS > **** > > PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
