What is Digg?Sponsored by American Express
The Perfect Gift for the Impossible-to-buy For view!
americanexpress.com - Quit guessing and help them get what's on their secret wishlist--with an American Express Gift Card.
48 Comments
- sfrahm, on 11/09/2007, -0/+21Not the first time that an AT&T affiliated company has violated privacy rights. They have done it right here in the US. Qwest was the only US phone company to buck against the warrantless NSA monitoring as far as I know. www.politicalgateway.com/news/read/107816 and they still are suffering the consequences for obeying the law.
- yourabi, on 11/09/2007, -3/+22it's really shameful when US companies forget our constitution in the name of profit!
- FreewareCityC0M, on 11/09/2007, -2/+19yahoo is accused of lying to a bunch of liars LOL
- CyberSally, on 11/09/2007, -0/+15Yahoo probably figured that Big Oil, Halliburton, and Blackwater can get away with lying to Congress, why not us too?
- inactive, on 11/09/2007, -2/+15Maybe G-Dub will grant them a presidential pardon - remember kids, lying to Congress isn't a crime if you are helping out the President.
- Smwbigboss, on 11/09/2007, -0/+10Impeach Yahoo.
- CraigJ, on 11/09/2007, -2/+12I like Google,
- simplynix, on 11/08/2007, -0/+10I agree, nice! It made me sick to hear Yahoo was guilty of these kind of things, and I've been moving further away from them ever since.
- simplynix, on 11/09/2007, -2/+12I'm sorry, were you under the impression that the US has a free market?
- skyfire1, on 11/09/2007, -1/+8Yahoo: "I did not have sex with that search engine!"
- clothmonkey, on 11/08/2007, -0/+7They know their own.
- trustinjohngalt, on 11/08/2007, -0/+5I am not sure if it was profit or laziness. Didn't they ask what they were looking for him for?
- rrlaw, on 11/09/2007, -0/+5It's for profit. More precisely it's for staying in China to do business and make money there. The communist government in China is very good at using business opportunity to force company to do this kind of things. Even Google China implements search result filter due to pressure from the Chinese government.
- PopcornDave, on 11/09/2007, -1/+6And neither is hit and run if you're a congressman.
http://www.commondreams.org/views/050500-104.htm - mikes1, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3So, according to Congresscritters, turning in US dissidents (ATT, Verizon, etc.) = good.
Turning in Chinese dissidents (Yahoo China) = bad. - williamdyer, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3Yahoo could, at the very least, have yanked their license to use the Yahoo name. Yahoo choose not to.
- fadeout, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3Yahoo! is run by a bunch of scumbags, this was enough to convince me not to renew my flickr pro account when it ran out. The only way to stop this kind of behavior is to not give them a cent.
- russ3, on 11/09/2007, -1/+3Congress doesn't have better more important things to do than make some guy apologize to them?
- fatdog789, on 11/08/2007, -5/+7Except that Yahoo China *isn't* an American company. It's a Chinese company, partially owned by Yahoo! US (which has only a 40% stake). As a Chinese company, it's bound by *Chinese* laws, not American laws.
Otherwise, companies that are partially owned by foreign companies would be bound by those countries' laws. - fatdog789, on 11/09/2007, -3/+5Yahoo China *isn't* an American company. It's a Chinese company, partially owned by Yahoo! US (which has only a 40% stake). As a Chinese company, it's bound by *Chinese* laws, not American laws.
This is different from MS and Google, which either maintain subsidiaries or are majority owners of their foreign branches.
Key difference: because MS is *one* company, the American branch's profits can be reached by the Euro courts. However, only Yahoo Euro (referring to any/all of the Euro branches) profits can be reached by the Euro courts. - CrazedLeper, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2Well, you'd think after all their hypocrisy and double talk they wouldn't get all hot and bothered about being lied to so maybe it's just more hypocrisy.
- WiseWeasel, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2So I guess that puts Yahoo next in line for the Presidential Medal of Freedom...
- vastrightwing, on 11/09/2007, -0/+2Next up, Congress investigating Comcast for poor service, high prices and trying to take advantage of all of its customers.
- mastapoohba, on 11/09/2007, -1/+3Yay I hate yahoo ever since they closed my 10 year account for no reason. I hope their crappy company withers away and becomes nothing, and then we can say Ya who? Like its a question.
- alansky, on 11/09/2007, -0/+2Basically, Yahoo is saying that protecting their right to do business in China is more important than doing the right thing. How pitiful is that?
- anthonylawrence, on 11/11/2007, -1/+3Everybody is always lying at congress, so why should this be any big issue. The US military lies to Congress. I think they do far more damage than Yahoo would.
- BufordT, on 11/09/2007, -2/+4Congress lies to the American people every waking hour. What's the big deal here?
- mikes1, on 11/10/2007, -1/+3Uh, it seems you've never learned about the Constitution. The US Constitution gives certain powers to government, it doesn't control companies. For instance, the US Government does not have any power to restrict free speech (and is in fact specifically _prohibited_ from restricting speech, just for good measure). That doesn't mean a company can't.
US companies are subject to US laws. As fatdog789 pointed out, Yahoo China isn't a US company. There's nothing to indicate they do business in the US, so US imperialist wishes aside, they're not subject to US law. - objectcode, on 11/08/2007, -3/+4he was talking about Canada
- inactive, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2So BUSH does it all the time .tell me something i don't know !! NEXT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- williamdyer, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2Yahoo China has a corporate parent in the U.S. As part of Yahoo China's contract to operate under the Yahoo name they no doubt have to obey a long and detailed list of conditions - in other words, they have to behave like Yahoo. If Yahoo's standards cannot be reconciled with Chinese laws, ***** 'em - they have to forego operating in China.
- ashwinmudigonda, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2omigosh! now what the congress no lamer ducker than the president is. All bite from a toothless mongrel. If the punishment given to yahoo is anything remotely more than a pinch, I will shave one half of my head and buy an iPhone.
- Authustian, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1Free Market? You might want to read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market - skyfire1, on 11/08/2007, -0/+1How long did it take you to come up with that comment?
- V1ncent, on 11/09/2007, -1/+2Congress lies to Congress so big whoop.
- JazD, on 11/09/2007, -0/+1Dugg ya!!! I got lots you can digg! Thanks!
- inactive, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1Lol?
- Koowan, on 11/09/2007, -1/+1So what? Congress doesn't care if the President, Vice President or their respective staffs lie to Congress so why pick on Yahoo? Frankly, the idea of Congressman Lantos (or anyone in Congress for that matter) lecturing ANYONE about morals is beyond laughable. We've spent decades putting money before morals in politics and society at large, so who gives a rat's anymore about lying to Congress. Get in line.
- Individualrts, on 11/11/2007, -0/+0Was amazed to see this happened to you. One week ago Yahoo cancelled an account I used for several years, just a normal account as I am not a spammer or involved in any illegal activity. They will not give me any reason, but they claim there is a reason. I lost years worth of emails. Word to the public: Yahoo can cancel your account at any time for no reason...and they won't even tell you why.
- ajwinder, on 11/08/2007, -0/+0When your companies executives in the US lie to congress, thats called, being in contempt of congress. That is against the law, lying to the Congress is a felony, which is what they're accused of, which is what they did, and which is why they're in trouble.
Businesses exist under the laws of the US, they dont get a free pass on it when operating here. You can hold your employees to non-disclosure agreements, however, firing someone for expressing their free speech rights would fall under wrongful termination or discrimination laws. You can't kill an employee for a bad performance. And the only reason they can limit, but not outright deny, free speech is because free speech isnt a blatant right. I dont have the right to go to a school and yell "EAT A DICK" at every kid that walks by. Freedom of speech has reasonable limits, and one of those is that companies can tell you not to release certain company info, if you so choose to accept and sign the NDA. They're still subject to all US laws and regulations. The idea that they're not is kinda, well, stupid and silly.
Beyond that, its pretty clear that the reasons behind it relate to wanting to get closer with the Chinese government in order to have an edge against Google, which, while not against the law, is pretty upsetting. - nzd9f1, on 11/09/2007, -0/+0this is to be be expected.
- sherifffruitfly, on 11/09/2007, -1/+0So what? They let the dubya administration lie to them daily.
- clothmonkey, on 11/08/2007, -5/+4Pointless spammish interjection! Buried!
- NYC83, on 11/08/2007, -2/+0nice?
- chuffdogg, on 11/08/2007, -3/+1Buried for improper exclamation point placement
- gunnerycox, on 11/08/2007, -6/+1That sucks!
- inactive, on 11/08/2007, -12/+2Its called the free market.
- twgarrett, on 11/08/2007, -12/+1Interesting!
