Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yahoo! Slammed Over Piracy By Chinese Court

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the dangerous-precedent dept.

The Internet 102

An anonymous reader writes "Setting a precedent likely to have far-ranging consequences, a Chinese court has once again lambasted Yahoo! China over piracy concerns. The search firm is (according to the court) infringing on intellectual property rights by allowing copyrighted materials to be downloaded from the internet via search results. 'John Kennedy, chairman and CEO of the International Federation of Phonographic Industries, or IFPI, said in a statement Thursday. "By confirming that Yahoo China's service violates copyright under new Chinese laws, the Beijing court has effectively set the standard for Internet companies throughout the country."'"

cancel ×

102 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

OH NOZ! (1, Funny)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781468)

an ISP is letting people access the internet? HOW DARE THEY?!

Re:OH NOZ! (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781864)

Is Yahoo an ISP or just a search provider in China? Or is AT&T called Yahoo over there?

Re:OH NOZ! (2, Funny)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781968)

Dunno but from what I've seen Yahoo China has a "warez search" option.

Re:OH NOZ! (2, Insightful)

Sparks23 (412116) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783334)

While here in the states Yahoo just sells rebranded AT&T broadband, in Asia, Yahoo is a major broadband provider.

I don't know about China specifically, but they're one of the faster, more reliable broadband services in Japan, and offer something not unlike Verizon FiOS. Including a broadband television service.

Re:OH NOZ! (2, Informative)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21786910)

Why is this marked '+5 insightful' when the post specifically says "I don't know about China specifically"...which makes the post irrelevant. The post is at best 'interesting'.

FWIW, I've lived in China for several years and haven't heard of any internet access service provided by Yahoo!. All broadband access I've heard of is provided by CNC, if not directly then by a reseller of some kind.

Re:OH NOZ! (5, Insightful)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782432)

Talk about calling the kettle black. China is probably the largest source of piracy. They really should handle the problem of people selling pirate CDs and DVDs before going after Yahoo for indexing some warez site.

Re:OH NOZ! (1)

solitas (916005) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782960)

I got a laugh out of the irony too. I regularly analyze china-counterfeits of my employer's products - they're found evenly distributed throughout the country and our other international markets.

Re:OH NOZ! (1)

Korveck (1145695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784330)

It is not only CD and DVD. Many Chinese companies are known to copy popular brands of goods, with names and appearance slightly modified, but far inferior performance and quality. A search engine is probably least of the concerns when it comes to piracy. This ruling will not improve the slightest bit of China's piracy problems.

Re:OH NOZ! (3, Interesting)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21787076)

It is not only CD and DVD. Many Chinese companies are known to copy popular brands of goods, with names and appearance slightly modified, but far inferior performance and quality. A search engine is probably least of the concerns when it comes to piracy. This ruling will not improve the slightest bit of China's piracy problems.
Indeed. The interesting thing about what you say is that the non-CD/DVD things are not sold to Chinese people (much) - the Chinese people I know, know full well the quality is crap and avoid places like that like the plague. DVDs are different, since they're good enough, and the real ones are too expensive (and difficult to find).

No, the clothing in particular is sold only as a tourist attraction. I'd say that the names and appearance aren't even slightly modified either - they're exactly the same, except that they don't last too long (perhaps they're 'seconds' or have failed quality control).

Re:OH NOZ! (5, Insightful)

daninbusiness (815223) | more than 6 years ago | (#21785052)

It's also telling/glaring that Baidu.com is not being held to the same standards. That site even has a specialized mp3 search on it - http://mp3.baidu.com/ [baidu.com] .


Large governments do tend to engage in nationalistic hypocracy, however, so I guess this shouldn't be terribly surprising.

Re:OH NOZ! (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21787056)

It's also telling/glaring that Baidu.com is not being held to the same standards. That site even has a specialized mp3 search on it - http://mp3.baidu.com/ [baidu.com] .


Large governments do tend to engage in nationalistic hypocracy, however, so I guess this shouldn't be terribly surprising.

Well, baidu is pretty much only used by Chinese people (though I don't see any English option on Yahoo!, but it's at least a more obvious target for westerns), so why would westerner companies care about that? I mean, Chinese people can't tend to afford western prices, so sales lost are probably small. In fact, piracy may be a good thing for the future of a product, in the same way it has been for MS Windows - it's pervasive here because it's free (almost). If MS Windows was it's real price, Linux would be much more popular (a la Walmart). With MS Windows being free, Linux doesn't stand much of a chance; and as the Chinese population become more able to afford the real price, MS can push for more enforcement, the public will mostly choose what they're familiar with. MS is already trying to force companies (ie entities that can afford the real price) to buy the real thing, and companies will choose MS because that's what their (existing/potential) employees know.

Re:OH NOZ! (1)

Sigismundo (192183) | more than 6 years ago | (#21785254)

Well, there is a different way of looking at it. It wasn't really China going after Yahoo! China, it was the IFPI (like the RIAA but an international organization) who filed a lawsuit, and the Chinese courts found in favor of the IFPI.

The article also mentions that the controlling stake of Yahoo! China is actually a Chinese company. So I don't really think that "pot calling the kettle black" is an appropriate analogy here. What did happen is an international organization took a Chinese company to task for linking to copyrighted material, and won.

The legislation that allowed the IFPI to win the lawsuit is relatively new, which says to me that China's government is making an effort to be more respectful of intellectual property, or at least appearing like they are. This particular law seems pretty ill-informed though. I don't think a search engine company should be punished because links to copyrighted material show up in search results.

If this new legislation and the lawsuit is any indication, it may become much easier for foreign companies to sue in China for copyright infringement.

Re:OH NOZ! (2, Informative)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21786990)

Talk about calling the kettle black. China is probably the largest source of piracy. They really should handle the problem of people selling pirate CDs and DVDs before going after Yahoo for indexing some warez site.
They are going after people selling CDs and DVDs. I've seen numerous DVD stores shutdown in the past year. To start with, the stores were forced to sell them under the counter or out of a back room, but now the stores are *gone*. Admittedly, these stores were near a Holiday Inn, so they're focusing on the more obvious (to westerners, at least) ones, but still.

I know of just one store now, and that is far from any hotels in the middle of an area populated mostly by Koreans. Furthermore, I've recently seen some *real* DVDs in that store. Of course, I don't *know* they're real, and I've not bought any because they're horrendously expensive (compared to salaries here). Even if I did buy them, I still don't know they're real - though I could probably tell to some degree since the English spelling/grammar/etc would be correct (well, it'd be US spelling, but still), and they would actually work without skipping...but who knows for sure? If there's one thing the Chinese are best at in the world (and there isn't just one thing, I'm sure), it's faking stuff and other scams/etc. They're really quite clever.

Of course, you can still buy them on the streets, but the few I've bought from them have been really poor quality (often a camcorder in a cinema).

When in China... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21781488)

When in China, do as the Chinese do... oh wait.

Re:When in China... (3, Funny)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781736)

When in China, do as the Chinese do...

Shoot people and charge their families for the bullet?

Re:When in China... (3, Funny)

diersing (679767) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782038)

Yeah! The American way is to kill them at the government's cost.

Re:When in China... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782684)

Well, the Americans doesn't use those painful bullets, though. They do it from far far away with Intelligent Bombing. That's much more excusable now, isn't it ?

Oh, and btw, please ignore any grammar/graphy errors. I'm no native English speaker and have no Spell checker at hand right now.

IS this pay back for the US GOV trying to stand up (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781490)

IS this pay back for the US GOV trying to stand up and block them from giving user info to the Chinese over then data.

I hope yahoo! does not send more people to Political Prisons.

Re:IS this pay back for the US GOV trying to stand (1)

mabhatter654 (561290) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781872)

no, this is less evil than that. The Chinese internet "security" market colluded with the copyright lobby to get this new law passed as it will require MORE spending on the "great firewall of china". Next article will be the Chinese court requiring Yahoo to pony up huge amounts for software and hardware to "protect copyrights".

These are US companies doing the lobbying... China is the prototype for what the US "security"/"morality" market wants the US govt to pass into law.

Re:IS this pay back for the US GOV trying to stand (2, Insightful)

LaughingCoder (914424) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782044)

Sure. Clamping down on internet access by their citizens (while forcing companies like Yahoo! to pay for it and take some of the blame) is not at all what the Chinese government wants. If you believe that, I have a firewall I'd like to sell you cheap that blocks all objectionable content (and you get to define objectionable).

No surprises (5, Interesting)

superbus1929 (1069292) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781492)

Yahoo earned this. They bent over backwards to do business with China, and now they're paying the karmic price. Personally, after what they did to those journalists and bloggers, I love it.

Nonsense! (1)

asphaltjesus (978804) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782070)

The Chinese government selected Yahoo! from a wide number of global dot-com companies cooperating with the Chinese government in not-so-appealing ways. It's impossible to know the details of why Yahoo! was called out.

I'm not selectively bashing the Chinese because it's only slightly different in the U.S. Look at how the Telco's gave the NSA what they wanted with no questions asked.

Re:Nonsense! (1, Insightful)

blueskies (525815) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784320)

I'm not selectively bashing the Chinese because it's only slightly different in the U.S. Look at how the Telco's gave the NSA what they wanted with no questions asked.
What universe to you live in? Since when has the NSA arrested anyone because they are critical on a blog, towards the US?

How is it a slight difference? Next you'll be saying the US is only slightly different than Iraq was under Saddam, because we have death by lethal injection and they dropped chemical weapons on Kurds.

It's Not a Moral Comparison (1)

asphaltjesus (978804) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784638)

That any of this behavior morally questionable is an endless flamefest. It's an observation that this kind of thing happens everywhere regardless of the legal/social structure.

Yahoo and probably lots of other companies are obligated to do as the Chinese authorities say if they wish to stay involved in the Chinese economy. In the U.S. AT&T ignored the obvious legal issues and gave the NSA exactly what they wanted, warrantless domestic survielance. Look what probably happened to qwest when they didn't do as the NSA asked. I'm too lazy to post a link, but there's a story about the CEO of qwest's troubles as a result of doing the legally right thing on /.

Re:Nonsense! (2, Insightful)

jamie(really) (678877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784664)

Since when has the NSA arrested anyone because they are critical on a blog, towards the US?

Er, actually this is happening. Except that say that its because the journalist's source is a terrorist and the journalist must reveal the source. Some have been held without trial indefinitely.

Next you'll be saying the US is only slightly different than Iraq was under Saddam, because we have death by lethal injection and they dropped chemical weapons on Kurds.

There have been 130,000 deaths in Iraq since the US invaded. The US has dropped cluster bombs on homes. The US dropped Agent Orange on Vietnam, the effects of which are still felt today. The US is the only nation to have used a nuclear weapon on a civilian population. We justified the attacks on civilian populations simply because they were "the enemy" and "they wont surrender". The US used small pox against its own indigenous population.

Might want to open your eyes before riding that high horse. I happen to think that the US is the greatest nation in the world, and the US constitution the greatest human work in the world, but lets be honest, anything involving humans and power is going to get fucked up.

Hmm... (5, Insightful)

snarfies (115214) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781498)

Hm, gee, I wonder if this same impossible standard will be applied to non-foreign companies in China.

My guess is "no."

Re:Hmm... (2, Insightful)

iknownuttin (1099999) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781626)

Hm, gee, I wonder if this same impossible standard will be applied to non-foreign companies in China.

My guess is "no."

Yeah, especially when you consider that much of the Chinese economy is based on pirated stuff.

Re:Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21781714)

China prosecuting someone for piracy is like a prostitute prosecuting someone for having sex.

If you think it's due to morals or legal obligation, you're nuts, it is only related to elimination of competition.

Re:Hmm... (1)

roguetrick (1147853) | more than 6 years ago | (#21790452)

"Las Vegas prosecuting someone for having sex" Either that or you've been with some big prostitutes with their own jurisdiction.

Re:Hmm... (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781926)

Considering that non-foreign companies are owned by the government, I don't think China will spend limit itself in this way when it may seriously cut into profits.

In the same article (3, Interesting)

hackingbear (988354) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782504)

Separately, the court also upheld a ruling on a similar case against Internet company Baidu. A lower court in November 2006 had found that Baidu had facilitated copyright infringement. But because this case was filed under older Chinese copyright laws in 2005, the company was not liable for copyright infringement, the IFPI said.

"We are disappointed that the court did not find Baidu liable," Kennedy said in a statement. "But that judgment was about Baidu's actions in the past, under an old law that is no longer in force. Baidu should now prepare to have its actions judged under the new law. We are confident a court would hold Baidu liable as it has Yahoo China."

So maybe Baidu has fixed their acts?

Oh... wait... is Baidu.com a Chinese company? That's hard to say because the fact is most successful Chinese Internet companies, including alibaba.com, which was funded by Softbank and Yahoo and which now owns Yahoo China, are funded and run by western VCs. But then that would answer your concern. Who cares the thousands of little real Chinese websites like the pirate DVD sellers across streets in China.

SLASHDOT SUX0RZ (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21781520)

_0_
\''\
'=o='
.|!|
.| |
Yahoo slammed over goatse by Chinese court [goatse.ch]

Re:SLASHDOT SUX0RZ (0, Offtopic)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782030)

www.manridingabike.cx?

Piracy != Privacy (2, Interesting)

\\ (118555) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781532)

Man, I thought that headline was "Yahoo! Slammed Over Privacy By Chinese Court", and I was really confused.

Re:Piracy != Privacy (1)

Mr. Underbridge (666784) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781998)

Man, I thought that headline was "Yahoo! Slammed Over Privacy By Chinese Court", and I was really confused.

Really, either one makes about the same amount of sense. Which is none.

Selective Enforcement (5, Funny)

corby (56462) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781592)

This is great news. I predict this law will end all copyright violations of photographs of the Tiananmen Square protests.

China has piracy concerns... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21781600)

...but no PRIVACY concerns (except when it comes to the government).

Isn't this the same country that recently had a Yahoo China employee jailed for dissidence?
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/13/2031243 [slashdot.org]

All legitimate companies need to leave China until the Chinese government seeks something besides oppression, and the companies seek something besides *just* a profit.

Re:China has piracy concerns... (0)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781716)

All legitimate companies need to leave China until the Chinese government seeks something besides oppression, and the companies seek something besides *just* a profit.

The United States has little manufacturing base left. The American economy is completely dependant on China.

Re:China has piracy concerns... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782946)

The United States has little manufacturing base left. The American economy is completely dependant on China.

Not quiet. Just because they make all the cheap shit, doesn't really affect the US economy. If China blocked all their crap from coming over today, we'd only spend our money on other things, services, eating out etc. China's would crumble pretty soon without the huge amount of western money entering their economy.

Re:China has piracy concerns... (2, Insightful)

jamie(really) (678877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784744)

You haven't looked at the US balance of payment figures lately have you? Nor what China does with all those dollars it gets?

If it turned its dollars into yuan, the yuan would get too expensive, so instead they look for dollar-based things to buy. Last I checked they were flooding the US credit market, by supporting all this government spending.

If we suddenly embargoed china, we'd be fucked. Though, honestly, we're just postponing the inevitable.

Re:China has piracy concerns... (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21787172)

It's not only cheap stuff, it's expensive stuff too. Pretty much anything that requires labour, which is cheap in China, is made here.

I'm using a Dell monitor and I look on the back and it says 'made in china'. I have an HP monitor too that was also made in China - though it wasn't for sale in China (I had to buy it in the US at high US prices and bring it back to China). My Apple TiBook was made in China too (Taiwan, IIRC, so it's probably a different case).

I think that's true of a lot of products - they're made in China because the labour is cheap, but they're not sold here. That's why western companies want to do business here - it's not to sell to Chinese people, but to exploit them - not necessarily in a bad way, but it makes them (the western companies) dependant on China.

When the Chinese population become more wealthy, then western companies will be more interested in selling here.

Re:China has piracy concerns... (1)

Titoxd (1116095) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783586)

The United States has little manufacturing base left. The American economy is completely dependant on China.
That's only partially true. As the recent mess with lead paint in toys showed, the U.S. is not as dependent on Chinese goods as you would expect. As soon as the news broke, several companies began responding to public perception and shifted their production from China to other countries. Companies understand that as long as it is acceptable to produce goods in China, they can continue to do so, but if it becomes unacceptable with their clients, they have two options: They can just slim their profit margins slightly and go somewhere, or they can stick with the cheapest per-unit costs, not sell anything, or die. That's the reason that Chinese high-ranking official was executed: Because the Chinese understand too that consumer expectations are one of the determinants of demand in the Western market economies. If the name of the entire country becomes associated negatively in the mind of the final consumer, the producers will avoid or pull back their operations in the country.

Re:China has piracy concerns... (1)

StormyWeather (543593) | more than 6 years ago | (#21786342)

That's not true, we make a lot of the machinery that makes the crap that we buy :)

In other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21781610)

China slams Yahoo over intellectual property issues?

In other news, tabloids are reporting Pot and Kettle are feuding, starting when Pot alledgely refered to Kettle as "black".

A trendsetter! (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781634)

By confirming that Yahoo China's service violates copyright under new Chinese laws, the Beijing court has effectively set the standard for Internet companies throughout the country.
A trendsetter! By amazing coincidence, Yahoo! China also sets the standard for companies that fold to totalitarian governments in the name of profits. I'm sure it will be no time at all before Yahoo! China takes care of this pesky issue to China's satisfaction.

silly chinks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21781638)

fucking slant-eyes

Re:silly chinks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782232)

How about some more relevant slurs, like scholarship snatchers, Clinton campaign financers, nuke secret leakers, alcohol dehydrogenase deficient, PbToys, Aquadot Pushers, petfood poisoners, and toothpaste tainters, and of course ROMheads (so culturally programmed as to be unalterable like its electronic counterparts).

Re:silly chinks (1)

TheDreadSlashdotterD (966361) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782698)

ROMheads... I know plenty of them here in America. Thanks for the new slur, I'll be using it later today.

Re:silly chinks (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782980)

That's totally unfair. You missed off lactose intolerant.

Re:silly chinks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21784670)

You racist troll. [ripway.com]

Time for .... (1)

moseman (190361) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781656)

a little tariff increase on Chinese products!

Why turn to gov't when you can do it yourself? (1)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782716)

Time for a little tariff increase on Chinese products!

How about we accept personal responsibility and take actions ourselves rather than rely on the government? Simply avoid Chinese products if at all possible. That has the added benefit that there is no opportunity for government level retaliation, WTO suits, etc.

Re:Time for .... (1)

jamie(really) (678877) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784820)

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to think "profiling is worse than the slaughter of innocent people..."

Those who cannot remember the past do not remember that profiling is how innocent people get slaughtered. My wife is alive only because the Nazis didn't have an accurate record of who married who. So make your databases for your profiling, just hope I don't get into power because I'll then use them to arrest anyone who supported them. :-)

If I understand this correctly... (4, Insightful)

explosivejared (1186049) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781678)

It is basically useless to run a search engine in China. If the search engine has to be responsible for ensuring that content it brings up is in compliance with each every law, sane or crazy, then the data set it opens up to the user will essentially be hacked into one tiny piece. This is perfect for big content and information repressing regimes. The internet is their biggest fear, a decentralized, cheap means of distributing information. If you can narrow its scope, as big content or an information repressing regime, you win.

"By confirming that Yahoo China's service violates copyright under new Chinese laws, the Beijing court has effectively set the standard for Internet companies throughout the country."

Translation: "The government has staked its claim. It will control the flow of information on the web across the board. This is just a small step."

Re:If I understand this correctly... (1)

Stanistani (808333) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781812)

If Yahoo has any spine left, their next step should be to close up Yahoo! China, leaving just one web page up with an explanation.

They laid down with pigs and got dirty.

Re:If I understand this correctly... (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781830)

I predict/surmise that China will have to relent or compromise. Search engines do good for the site owners of copyrighted material when the return results act as free advertising.

Site owners who DON'T want their sites OR material OR both to appear should add flags in the site headers. Yahoo! and other search engines could make some deal (not for exploitation by content owners) that if they opt out, then they stand to lose out on advertising. If they opt in, they flag how deep the sites can crawl down through their sites.

But, still, tributary and unauthorized sites reproducing or acting as torrents for material will still circumvent these crawl-depth flags, effectively nullifying what the Chinese courts are trying to impose.

But, then, maybe they don't care. It will be good for Baidu. BUT, then the US will complain and go the WTO, citing barriers to free trade...

Re:If I understand this correctly... (1)

Daniel_Staal (609844) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782808)

Sounds like a good idea. I say we call the option file 'robots.txt' or something like that.

IFPI (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781738)

IFPI = another group of middle men that needs to fucking die already.

Re:IFPI (1)

richie2000 (159732) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782510)

I like to think of these "people" (and I use that term very loosely) in the context of Mr. Morden on Babylon 5. Oh, how I'd love to be Vir...

I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price. I would look up into your lifeless eyes and wave, like this [smiles and waves his fingers at Morden]. Can you and your associates arrange that for me, Mr. Morden?

Re:IFPI (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782898)

Oh, come on! That's not a fair comparison at all.

The Shadows wanted to spread chaos, death, and destruction across the galaxy. They DESERVED to get their home base nuked by Sheridan.

That doesn't mean it's fair to compare them to LAWYERS, though.

Re:IFPI (1)

Todd Knarr (15451) | more than 6 years ago | (#21786138)

I'm minded of another line from the same show, by a Mr. A. Bester. It went roughly like this:
"Did you really think I'd just sit back and let a group of evil aliens walk in and enslave Earth? That's my job.". I see certain parallels between China and Bester here.

Re:IFPI (1)

richie2000 (159732) | more than 6 years ago | (#21788898)

Personally, I'd cast the Chinese as the evil aliens and Mr. Kennedy of IFPI as Bester. Unfortunately for us, they seem to get along fine so far...

The Chinese already don't have real Internet (1)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781778)

The Chinese already have to deal with the Great Firewall. Chances of them searching for anything and it coming up are slim to none. People need to stop concentrating on the symtoms of this problem and deal with the source. The repressive regime of a Government that is China.

Irony? (2, Insightful)

phoebusQ (539940) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781786)

I don't want to get into a semantic argument about the definition of "irony", but it sure seems "ironic" that China, arguably the piracy capital of the world, is labasting a search company about piracy concerns.

Karl Marx has spun bearings and puked a rod... (1)

KudyardRipling (1063612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781806)

I take it that members of the CCP are finally being ill-affected by piracy. It is not 'communism'; it is called Socialism with Chinese characteristics. This must be one of those characteristics.

Loosely translated... (3, Insightful)

rtechie (244489) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781822)

"A Chinese court has ruled that Chinese companies do not like competition from American companies so they are going to tar Alibaba.com with the "pirate" brush until Yahoo! divests the company. Then they'll ignore the complaints against Alibaba.com."

Great FireWall of China (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21781896)

Here's an older story on how Chinese government is using its gulag system composed of political dissidents and Falun Gong to build the Great Fire Wall of China. [ripway.com] [News]

Re:Great FireWall of China (1)

PanchoVilla (663869) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782544)

warning above is a goatse link. Don't click it.

Huh? (1)

Cleon (471197) | more than 6 years ago | (#21781924)

Wait...China is accusing Yahoo of piracy?

Keep throwing those stones, China; I'm sure it'll do wonders for your glass house.

Re:Huh? (1)

level_headed_midwest (888889) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782354)

Yes, it makes sense. The U.S. blamed China for rampant copyright infringement, so China blames an American-owned company (or as much American-owned as a company can be in China) for the infringement. It's a time-honored legal tactic: blame the person blaming you for causing the problem.

Your... (2, Insightful)

Sleeping Kirby (919817) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782008)

"Your aunt's cousin's mother's friend's gardener's dog's best friend's owner downloaded watched a movie she's not suppose to. You're going to prison!!!"

I also think we need to sue Toyota for all the car accidents in the world, the fire/matches for all the destruction in Southern California and god for any and all wars/plagues after 0 BC... WTF?!?

But yeah, this isn't surprising from a country that had a campaign to kill rice eating birds... only to have the locusts devastate their crops the next year.

Re:Your... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782844)

You do know Toyota is not Chinese, now, don't you ?

Re:Your... (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21787320)

You do know Toyota is not Chinese, now, don't you ?
You forgot to mention that matches and God aren't Chinese either.

Of course, Chinese people would probably argue that Japanese originated in China anyway...

Re:Your... (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782922)

I also think we need to sue ... god for any and all wars/plagues after 0 BC... WTF?!?
Because before Christ was born, the wars and plagues were caused by Jeff, god of biscuits?

Re:Your... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782940)

One could argue that God (Capital G), existed before 0 BC. It was Christ that was born after 0 BC.

Re:Your... (1)

KudyardRipling (1063612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784692)

[oralfroth]

It is not what that Jew did in the past that the world hates him. It is what that Jew will do. If Jeff were the one who will cast the Antichrist and the False Prophet (govenment-media-commecial-entertainment-industrial complex) into the Lake of Fire (that means spoiling all the fun and games of the world oligarkhij), he would be just as hated and despised as he.

[/oralfroth]

Now back to our blather about the fox guarding the henhouse.

So? (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782046)

I could really give a fuck about the state of copyright infringement in China.

Re:So? (1)

porpnorber (851345) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783122)

I could really give a fuck about the state of copyright infringement in China.

You're a member of Prostitutes for the RIAA, or you mean 'could' in the technical sense of 'couldn't'?

Sorry, sometimes I just can't resist.

Yes, they should know better than indexing things (0, Offtopic)

ohgood (1144715) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782126)

(Didn't RTFA) China how I love your goods, China pirates knock on woods, China gathers all the tools, and throws them to the lions.

Sure... (1)

finalfantasygamer (1111755) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782442)

but the Chinese Disneyland is okay though, right?

Re:Sure... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782686)

To me that would depend. Has the various copyrighted disney things used there expired into the public domain according to Chinese copyright? Just because the US extends it's copyright terms essentially to infinity (by repeatedly extending them before the durations expire) it doesn't mean that (US Law) applies to all other countries.

If those things are currently under copyright by Chinese copyright law, then no, it's not ok.

Re:Sure... (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 6 years ago | (#21789202)

it doesn't mean that (US Law) applies to all other countries.
Some people [zdnet.co.uk] seem to think it does. [bbc.co.uk]

Heard this argument before (3, Insightful)

dkarma (985926) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782534)

in the US. Wasn't the RIAA claiming that ISPs "make available" their copyrighted materials via search results? (If i remember correctly that was slapped down in US court or countered via actual legislation)
This basically settles the opinion IMO that the RIAA's views on copyright infringement is akin to that of the Chinese government.
SCARY!

Now included with your Yahoo search results in China: 10 years hard labor!

Paging Dr. Freud (1)

PHAEDRU5 (213667) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782632)

I wonder why I originally read "IFPI" as "International Federation of Pornographic Industries"?

Re:Paging Dr. Freud (1)

eiapoce (1049910) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783246)

I tell you why. You read the sentence and then imagined this "John Kennedy, chairman and CEO of the IFPI" drooling happy just like a dog at the idea that in china there are no legal limits to the amount of abuse that the citizen can be subject to. Maybe he's already contemplating new forms of DRM or abuse to experiment on those unfortunate people before trying to export them to more civilized places.

Then you associated this already fetish image to the quality products of the german filmography that you can preview by inputting "private fetish" into google.

Same as in Finland (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782712)

Seems like the copyright people in China think the same way as they do in Finland. If you ask them, it's illegal to have a search engine that links to their material or any kind of copyrighted material without permission. This is just China enforcing the tight copyright laws (to their own advantage, naturally) that USA has lobbied them through WTO. Luckily our police has yet to enforce the view of the copyright organizations that really share the view of Chinese in how copyright laws work, except for a few small cases. Sadly USA has spread these laws through WTO to us as well and it really seems to be illegal to link without permission. So search engines in Finland are just as illegal as they are in China if they link to such material.

apologize for China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21782904)

First Mattel had to apologize for lead tainted toys manufactured in China. Now Yahoo will have to apologize for copyright infringement in China.
If you want to do business in China, apparently, you must apologize for their lack of standards.

Re:apologize for China (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21787350)

Why don't you blame the companies for lack of quality control? It's the companies lack of standards that are the main problem here, not (just) China's. ...or at least ignorance of Chinese tendency to 'cut corners' and other scam-like behaviour (anything to increase profit). That was my first thought when I heard about the lead thing, 'Ha! Ignorant US fools. They should have expected that and put some decent quality control in place.'. Then I thought it's probably not as simple as that...but still.

Pot calling kettle black... (0, Flamebait)

Nonillion (266505) | more than 6 years ago | (#21782982)

What? Isn't this like the pot calling the kettle black? China, you have the worst piracy / animal / human rights record on the fucking planet. So, I recommend you take one step back, look at yourself and shut the fuck up.

It's bad enough your "leader" has declared himself an Internet expert. And when he visited the US some time ago, played a round of golf, and then declared to his people he made 18 holes-in one I will never take your country, let alone your judicial system seriously while you spew stupid bullshit like this.

Re:Pot calling kettle black... (1)

ShinmaWa (449201) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783442)

It's bad enough your "leader" has declared himself an Internet expert. And when he visited the US some time ago, played a round of golf, and then declared to his people he made 18 holes-in one I will never take your country, let alone your judicial system seriously while you spew stupid bullshit like this.
That was Kim Jong Il, the Dear Leader of North Korea, not China. Besides, he only claimed to have made 11 holes in one -- much more realistic ;)

Re:Pot calling kettle black... (1)

Nonillion (266505) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783588)

Thanks for the correction, boy is my face red...

Wow.... (2, Informative)

CrAlt (3208) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783624)

"It's bad enough your "leader" has declared himself an Internet expert. And when he visited the US some time ago, played a round of golf, and then declared to his people he made 18 holes-in one I will never take your country, let alone your judicial system seriously while you spew stupid bullshit like this."

How do you expect anyone to take YOU seriously when you don't even know the difference between N. Korea and China. The leader you are thinking of is Kim Jong Il of North Korea. He had his nation's media report that he made many holes in one on a single round on his 1st attempt at golfing...
http://www.anyonefortee.com/Shots/Kim.html [anyonefortee.com]

intellectual property and communism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21783042)

Yes, I know China is not a true communist government.

But, "intellectual property" seems to be quite opposite to communism.
(Especially in the modern 100-year copyright sense).

But for an authoritarian government, it's best to have everything be illegal, leaving all the power in the punishment leeway. So the government can pick what person or company to prosecute depending on the political or economic benefits of doing so. "Intellectual property" fits well with that. "Ah ha. You sang Happy Birthday. That will cost you your house."

playing the word association game (1)

wikinerd (809585) | more than 6 years ago | (#21783916)

I can't resist. I'll say it!

Phonographic

Even though I always consistently with no single exception pause with great surprise upon reading this word, I think my pattern classifier is correct to place it in the category it always does, perhaps it better describes the value of their contribution to society.

i'm shocked (2, Insightful)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | more than 6 years ago | (#21784250)

I'm from China. According to my knowledge (yes I may be wrong) there is a corrupted and politics-oriented jurisdiction system in China but these judges in Beijing are simply performing the practice of Foolishness, which is very unusual.

And the "new" copyright law... What the fuck is that? I'm not a lawyer but I think I'll be digging in the library for a while in search of the new law. OK if there is really such a piece of crap in our laws there must be some fucking shit in the head of the congressmen or are they using a M$-made statistics software for the put-up-your-hand-and-say-yes-now-please-or-you-are-fucked National Congress?

Yes this law that asks internet search providers to be liable to the contents of their search results, if exists, is suicidal. No matter what's the reason for such a law come into being it would sooner or later kill the whole search engine industry. By then, nobody can perform Web-searches any more, including those fucking law makers themselves. Students and teachers in colleges may no longer search Google scholar, Scirus or even use services like JSTOR or ProQuest. Businesses may no longer find each other over the internet. Communist party may no longer poison or censor Web applications (contributing further to the rate of unemployment).

Maybe I'm wrong but I would still say that there's no reason for such a law to exist, even if we consider the very nature of the Chinese government. Perhaps tomorrow my library would tell me "sorry we no longer provide book search services because we can't be liable of the search results. Those books may contain non-communism-compliant material or other law-infringing contents."

Nuts.

Re:i'm shocked (1)

z-j-y (1056250) | more than 6 years ago | (#21786460)

it would sooner or later kill the whole search engine industry


And the problem is?...

Just look at USA, the country is at risk of electing a nutcase as president, thanks to Google and Youtube. It wouldn't have happened in a million years otherwise.

Not cool, man, government is supposed to be for stability, harmony, 3 representations and 8 shame/honor stuff.

In other news... (1)

milamber3 (173273) | more than 6 years ago | (#21787112)

The US government issued a statement blasting several map publication houses today. Warning them that they are knowingly aiding murderers to find the way to their victims. President Bush himself told the press he was disappointed in the democratic congress for not enacting tougher regulations on these obviously criminal activities.

Re:In other news... (1)

dwater (72834) | more than 6 years ago | (#21787384)

Well, I read something similar about map makers in NYC not being allowed to make their maps available because it would aid terrorists....I forget the exact details, but it sounds awefully similar.

This is the Chinese Government in Operation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21789268)

China doesn't need Yahoo anymore. They (the Chinese) have already stole everything they need. So they are now making way for thier own Chinese people to cut out Yahoo. Same thing with the toy industry. Under orders from the Chinese government American owned toy companies in China where ordered to damage the U.S. toy companies products. This does two things. It weakens the American economy, thus damaging Americas ability to operate and it destroys confidence in U.S. products world wide. All of these things are STANDARD modes of operation by the Chinese government and businesses. They only need you long enough to steal what you have and then take you out and replace you with Chinese owned or backed companies. In fact there are many Chinese backed companies operating secretly throughout the U.S. and Europe to steal, damage and inflick injury on the unsuspected population. The worlds largest terrorist orgainzation is the Chinese government. So good luck sheep. -anon

I wouldn't make too much of this (1)

sentientbrendan (316150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21790618)

In the US, if a precedent is set by the courts, this determines future cases as well. This is true only because of the independent judiciary and the rule of law. The judicial branch of the government has power completely independent of the congress or president, and the other branches can't countermand them or remove justices. In many ways the judicial branch is more powerful than any other.

In china, all power derives from various factions in the communist party and personal loyalties. Even basic things like succession of the head of state aren't really nailed down yet (the guy, Jiang, was the first one to willingly give up power and even he hung on in some ways afterwards). There is no such thing as the rule of law in a country like that. You can be sure that the verdict here is little more than a sign that someone in yahoo china lost a power struggle. Don't imagine that this is a precedent that indicates that china will actually start enforcing the copyright of western companies.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?