Google, Microsoft and Yahoo sign rules of conduct against censorship
Yahoo, Google and Microsoft have signed a code of conduct called the Global Network Initiative that prescribes how to conduct business in countries with restrictions on freedom of expression.
The rules, which have not yet been published, have been drawn up in collaboration with human rights organizations and compliance with them will be monitored by independent experts, writes the Wall Street Journal. The code of conduct requires, among other things, that privacy-restricting rules are interpreted as strictly as possible and that requests for the release of user data must be motivated in writing. Also, a decision to do business in a country should be preceded by extensive research into that country’s reputation for privacy and freedom of expression. Several other companies, including eBay, are still considering signing the code of conduct.
The companies come with the rules after years of criticism of the way American companies do business, especially in China. Yahoo in particular was criticized a few times for providing information about users, which led to the arrest of dissidents on several occasions. Google also came under fire for censoring the search results of its Chinese search engine. Last year, a bill was introduced in the US to restrict trade freedom in censorship countries, including by prohibiting the placement of servers in such countries. The release of personal data to local authorities should also be prohibited, unless approved by the US judiciary. Google, Microsoft and Yahoo thought this proposal was too restrictive and therefore saw more in self-regulation.
One potential problem is that the companies have partners in censorship countries over which they have no operational control. For example, the Yahoo brand in China is owned by the company Alibaba, in which Yahoo has a minority share. Yahoo’s US headquarters has therefore defended the allegations of disclosing the identities of dissidents, arguing that it cannot control how its local partner behaves. The code of conduct states that in such cases the American company must do its ‘best effort’ to ensure that business partners, investors and suppliers comply with the rules.
Mortan Sklar of the World Organization for Human Rights USA has indicated that he does not support the proposals because there are no legal obligations for the participating companies. Among other things, he wants to find out to what extent American and international laws are violated by companies that do business in countries with restrictions on freedom.