U.S. Citizen Sues Web Hosting Company for Identifying Him to Thai Government

A suit was filed yesterday against Netfirms, a Canadian web hosting company incorporated in the United States, for releasing personal information to the Thai government. Netfirms’ disclosures allowed Thai officials to identify, detain, and interrogate the plaintiff, Mr. Anthony Chai, both in Thailand and on U.S. soil. These disclosures, without which Mr. Chai would have remained anonymous, resulted in the Thai government charging Mr. Chai with violating a Thai law that restricts free speech – ironically, for comments he wrote online criticizing that very law.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California by the World Organization for Human Rights USA and the Law Office of Snell & Wilmer, alleges that the company’s conduct violated California state law, as well as Constitutional and international human rights law. "This case lies at the intersection of privacy guarantees, freedom of expression, international human rights law and the Internet. I am honored to work with Human Rights USA on this important case," said M.C. Sungaila, Partner with Snell & Wilmer.

As set out in the complaint, Mr. Chai, owns a computer store in Long Beach, California from which he and his patrons would access and anonymously post comments on a Thai-language pro-democracy website, Manusaya.com, hosted by Netfirms. Many of the anonymous comments expressed concern with Thailand’s lese majesté laws which prohibit any negative statements about the Thai monarchy and provide for severe punishment, including imprisonment for up to fifteen years.

Mr. Chai’s privacy rights were violated when, at the request of Thai government officials, Netfirms suspended Manusaya’s account and provided Mr. Chai's IP address and e-mail address to the Thai officials without notice and without his consent. As a result of this release of Mr. Chai’s confidential personal information to Thai government officials, he was subsequently detained at the Bangkok airport, taken to the Department of Special Investigations, and interrogated about his postings on the website. After finally being released from police custody in Bangkok and returning home to California, Mr. Chai was then interrogated by Thai officials over the course of two days on U.S. soil at a hotel in Hollywood, California. Mr. Chai was later informed by Thai officials that if he returns to Thailand, he will be arrested and charged with violating lese majesté laws.

Theresa Harris, Executive Director of Human Rights USA said, “Internet companies need to take great care before releasing confidential information to investigators, especially when those requests come from foreign governments. Information is power, and these companies have the power to place a person at peril of imprisonment for the equivalent of an anonymous letter to the editor. Companies must be held accountable when they disregard the rights of the people who use their services.”

Mr. Chai's case underscores the need for internet communications corporations, no matter how big or small, to put human rights first in their business dealings. When a company provides tools for international communications as its primary service, human rights are an inherent part of the business model.

Lawsuit says Cisco is responsible for human rights violations

Another US tech giant has been sued for its complicity in human rights abuses in China. Falun Gong practitioners have filed a lawsuit against Cisco Systems, Inc. in a federal court in San Jose, seeking to hold the company accountable for its role in human rights abuses resulting from the "Great Firewall of China." The plaintiffs are represented by the Human Rights Law Foundation and the law firm Schwarcz, Rimberg, Boyd, & Rader.

More information is available here: Cisco sued, accused of helping design China's Great Firewall

Human Rights USA filed the first such lawsuit against an Information, Technology & Communications (ICT) company when it represented Shi Tao, Wang Xiaoning, and their families in their lawsuit against Yahoo, Inc.

Take Action: Help Google Protect Your Online Human Rights

Friends of Human Rights USA know that we take protecting online human rights seriously. So we are happy to support an initiative by EPIC inviting everyone who uses the 'net to help Fix Google Privacy.

From EPIC's website:

The FTC is seeking public comment on its proposed Agreement with Google
regarding Google Buzz, and EPIC wants your voice to be heard! EPIC will send your comments and information to the FTC and use them to help us write our own comprehensive recommendations to the FTC.

Click here to send your comments. Stand up for your right to online privacy!

IN THE NEWS: Google Takes Action

Human Rights USA applauds Google's decision to turn its words into action by shutting down its search service in the Chinese mainland. As we shared with you several months ago, Google threatened to no longer bow to Beijing's demands following a cyber-attack that allegedly originated in China. Yesterday, Google stated it would stop censoring search results on its site in China and began to route users through its site in Hong Kong.

Unfortunately, Chinese government censors are now censoring results routed through the Google Hong Kong sites. Click here to see Google's Mainland China service availability. Stay tuned here for further developments....

In the News: Updates re China and Google

The United States Senate continues to keep an eye on the human rights practices of technology companies, as evidenced by an announcement by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) that the Judiciary Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law will hold a hearing this month on global Internet freedom. Read the release from his Office here. On Tuesday, February 2, 2010, in response to the recent cyber attacks against Google in China (for more, on our coverage of that event click here and here), Durbin asked 30 leading companies, including Amazon, Apple, Facebook, IBM, Nokia and Twitter, for information about their human rights practices in China. Stay tuned for more on the hearing...

In the meantime, we thought our readers might be interested in knowing what Bill Gates has to say about Google's announcement. According to the New York Times, "Mr. Gates declared himself unimpressed and a bit perplexed by Google’s recent threat to drop its search business in China to protest Chinese censorship of search after attacks apparently intended to spy on Gmail accounts of human-rights activists. 'They’ve done nothing and gotten a lot of credit for it,' Mr. Gates said." Let's hope they DO something soon. For the full article, click here.

Internet Freedom: What about Thailand?

Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made several important and poignant remarks regarding internet freedom. See our blog entry here. But one country was markedly absent from her review: Thailand. Thailand’s law of lese majeste (meaning "injured majesty"), which has been on the books since 1957, prohibits anyone from "defaming, insulting or threatening" the monarchy. This law is taken seriously (one offense can land you from 3 to 15 years in prison) and enforced broadly – very broadly. For example, a 27-year old student was investigated after refusing to stand up when the royal anthem was played before a film screening. The student was struck with popcorn and assaulted with rolled up movie flyers by other audience members. Now, he says he hides in safe houses and disguises his appearance when he has to venture outside.

Recently, Thailand has ramped up efforts to monitor lese majeste violations on the internet. Thailand’s Computer Crime Act of 2007 requires internet service providers to keep information about its users for 90 days and allows authorities to search this information free of judicial oversight. Since late 2008, thousands of websites have been censored. Indeed, within one month of taking control, the new government had entirely blocked 4,000 websites and noted that 10,000 sites contained "damaging remarks" about the monarchy. The new information minister even pledged 80 million baht (about 1.7 million euro) to develop an internet filtering system.

In addition to blocking websites, the police have used the new computer law to crack down on those accused of violating the oppressive lese majeste laws. In early 2009, an editor of a news website was arrested for allowing others to post comments about the monarchy to her website. A few months later, police arrested two people accused of using the internet to spread false rumors about the king’s health. One of the accused claimed that all she had done was translate an article from a financial news provider that linked the decline of the stock market to anxiety about the king’s poor health.


What's more, this law has been enforced against many non-Thai nationals who were arrested and sometimes convicted once they set foot on Thai soil. Human Rights USA is troubled to see such censorship and oppression of freedom of speech and expression. We urge the United States and foreign governments to work together to ensure the internet is free and safe for all users in the global community.

BREAKING NEWS: Secretary Clinton’s Address Regarding Internet Freedom – the Power to Energize or Destroy

In her address regarding internet freedom today at the Newseum in Washington, DC, Secretary of State Clinton recognized American companies’ “shared responsibility” to protect the freedom of expression and called on business to make a principled stand to support that freedom, even if such a stand is not the most profitable option. Human Rights USA applauds these remarks. In the coming months, the Department of State will hold a series of talks regarding this shared responsibility – and we call on American companies to pay attention and participate.

Noting that the United States “stand[s] for a single internet,” Secretary Clinton stated that foreign governments who censor and limit the internet are creating an “Information Curtain” and contravening the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (A recent victim of such activity, who was among many who have been targeted in Egypt for blogging, was present in the audience; more here). The freedom to connect, she explained, is the cyberspace version of the freedom of assembly and the United States is taking concrete steps to support that freedom, including addressing internet freedom in the first resolution it introduced after rejoining the UN Human Rights Council.

Though information is a powerful tool to create real change – from allowing word of atrocities in Iran to reach the rest of the world to locating a young girl amidst the rubble in Haiti – issues of hate speech and anonymous speech must be addressed. Secretary Clinton recognized that the internet is “not an unmitigated blessing” – it has the power to energize…but it also has the power to destroy. We encourage the American government, American companies, foreign governments and companies and you, internet users, to do your part to make the internet a force for good.

For more information on the topics covered in Secretary Clinton’s address, including the link between internet access and economic growth, the work in 40 countries to help those who are silenced, and the work of the European Commission on Cybercrime (see the Convention here and info from DOJ here), click here for coverage from Business Week, here for the AP, here for the New York Times, and here for CNN.




(With research assistance from International Justice Project interns Daniel Cousineau and Katie Miller)

Update regarding Google in China: Meetings and Mobile Phones

A large outcry of support followed Google’s January 12 announcement that it is no longer willing to continue censoring results on Google.cn. This statement by Google is a definite step in the right direction and shows the company’s willingness to take a hard line against the Chinese government. Google is optimistic that it can persuade the Chinese government to agree to changes that will allow the display of uncensored search results. As of Friday, January 15, 2010, Google had not set a deadline for an agreement and, while Google had alerted the Chinese Government to its plan, a spokesperson for Google did not know whether any additional meetings had been scheduled. Pending the results of any agreement with the Chinese government, business will continue as it did before last Tuesday’s announcement. However, while not confirmed as directly related to the dispute with the Chinese government, today Google postponed the launch of its mobile phone in China that was scheduled to occur tomorrow.

For now, the question remains whether Google will have the determination to hold its hard line and follow through on its threat to pull out of China if no acceptable agreement can be reached. Google’s willingness to relinquish a share of the largest internet market in the world would send a powerful message that the company is not willing to compromise the human rights of any people and set an example for other corporations currently doing business in China. We hope that Google will reverse the trend the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. noted so many years ago in stating, “Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken, the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investments.”

For more information on the debate surrounding whether Google will pull out of China click here.

~By Lindsey Ingraham, Legal Intern, International Justice Project

IN THE NEWS: Googling Human Rights

Every now and again, we have the welcome opportunity to congratulate a corporation for good human rights practices. Today we say "Bravo!" to Google for taking a stand to support human rights. Yesterday, the internet company disclosed information about attacks on its infrastructure originating in China. During its own investigation into what initially looked like corporate espionage, Google found "evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists." Google's investigation also revealed that hackers targeted "dozens" of other gmail accounts used by people around the world who support human rights in China.

As a result, Google announced: "We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China."

Google has always distinguished between censorship and surveillance -- and rightly so. When corporations help governments to censor the information people can access, they are helping that government to violate the right to information. That's not ideal, but it differs from providing a government with the tools to repress free speech and target human rights activists. Consciously providing a government with the technology to quash dissent, and to identify, arrest, and torture advocates who are exercising their right to free speech makes a corporation a partner in crime. (Rebecca MacKinnon is a good source a more thorough discussion of this issue.)

Google recognized this distinction years ago and decided not to fall into the latter category. Recognizing the risks human rights defenders may face online, the company conscientiously avoided allowing its servers to retain individual user information connected to content -- for example, blogging or chat services -- in China.

Despite the corporation's good intentions, Google has found it difficult to continue operating its censored searches in China without being complicit in that government's surveillance of human rights advocates. By taking a stand, Google is upholding its commitments to the principles of the Global Network Initiative, a voluntary code of ethics created by "a multi-stakeholder group of companies, civil society organizations (including human rights and press freedom groups), investors and academics ... to protect and advance freedom of expression and privacy in the ICT sector."

Go Google. We hope other corporations take notice.

Shi Tao Receives Human Rights Watch Hellman/Hammett Grant

On Monday, October 12, 2009, Human Rights Watch announced 37 winners of the Hellman/Hammett Grant, which is given annually to writers “in recognition of their commitment to free expression and their courage in the face of political persecution.” We were pleased to learn that former Human Rights USA client, Shi Tao, was among those recognized by this award.

From the Human Rights Watch Press Release:
Shi Tao (China), poet and writer, worked as a reporter and editor at a number of newspapers and has published several volumes of poetry. He is best known in the West as the victim of Yahoo’s cooperation with the Chinese police. In a now-famous case, Yahoo helped the Chinese police identify Shi Tao as the author of a message posted anonymously on an overseas website about instructions that the Chinese propaganda department had given to newspapers. He is currently serving a 10-year sentence for “illegally providing state secrets overseas.”

In 2007, Human Rights USA represented Shi Tao in a groundbreaking corporate accountability lawsuit against Yahoo! Inc. During the course of litigation, information emerged from Yahoo! that the corporation knew about the charges against Shi Tao and, despite that knowledge, disclosed confidential records about him to the Chinese government. During a hearing before the United States Congress, Yahoo! corporate leaders were chastised for their actions and asked to apologize to the families of Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning, who had traveled to the U.S. for the hearing. Shortly after, the families settled with the company out of court.

Unfortunately, Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning remain in prison, but the work of advocacy groups like Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders, and recognitions like this prestigious prize from Human Rights Watch, continue to raise awareness about their situation. The plight of Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning also reinforces the need for Information and Communications Technology corporations to respect fundamental human rights when doing business in countries that use electronic communications to target human rights defenders and the media.

To read one of Shi Tao’s inspiring poems, and learn more about the repression of free media in China, click here.

Human Rights USA Supporter Doug Wilson Speaks to TED TV About Corporate Accountability

Longtime Human Rights USA supporter and human rights advocate Doug Wilson gave a speech in February 2008 to Ted TV about corporate accountability in the internet era. The annual conference brings together the world's most fascinating thinkers and doers, who are challenged to give the talk of their lives. During the presentation, Mr. Wilson urged U.S. companies to adapt a "human rights framework" when selling their products and technologies into repressive regimes.

Mr. Wilson illustrated that during the modern internet era, technology sold by US companies into repressive regimes can be used to help "harass, kidnap, intimidate, torture, and ultimately imprison" journalists, activists, and bloggers.

Human Rights USA is fighting to prevent such abuses from occurring by holding corporations accountable for their human rights violations in US Courts. Mr. Wilson specifically cited Human Rights USA's lawsuit against Yahoo! Inc., in which Yahoo! was held accountable for aiding and abetting the arbitrary and prolonged detention of journalists and human rights advocates in China.

To view his talk, and to obtain further information about Doug Wilson, please visit his website: http://douglasawilson.com. To read more about TED, please visit www.ted.org.

Human Rights USA Pays Tribute to Rep. Tom Lantos

Human Rights USA pays tribute to Rep. Tom Lantos (D-CA), who died of esophageal cancer on Monday, February 11, 2008. Lantos, a Holocaust survivor who twice escaped from forced labor prison camps, was one of Congress’s most outspoken advocates for the protection of human and civil rights.

Led by strong moral convictions and an unwavering devotion to justice, Lantos reached across the political aisle to inspire bipartisan cooperation on human rights issues. As Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Lantos teamed up with Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) in his relentless pursuit of justice for two of Human Rights USA’s clients, Chinese free speech advocates Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning, who are imprisoned as a result of the cooperation between U.S. internet giant Yahoo! and the Chinese government.

At a hearing on November 6, 2007, Lantos and Smith sharply questioned Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang for his company’s role in the arrest, imprisonment, and torture of Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning. Lantos urged Yang to apologize to the detainees, and to “beg forgiveness” from the detainees’ families, who attended the hearing. Yang turned and bowed, and later acknowledged their responsibility. One week later, Yahoo! and the families settled the Alien Tort Claims Act/Torture Victims Protection Act lawsuit filed by Human Rights USA on behalf of Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning, and stated its commitment to preventing further abuses of this type.

For the past twenty-four years, Lantos and his wife, Annette, sought to make human rights a more visible issue in Congress by establishing the Congressional Human Rights Caucus (CHRC). The CHRC is designed to bring together members of Congress, Administration officials, and human rights experts to address human rights concerns and to bring them to the forefront of Congress’ work. Through Lantos’ leadership, the group has succeeded in drawing attention to issues concerning the rights of women and children, ethnic genocide, and disappearances, among many others.

Tom Lantos’ leadership, both as a member of Congress and as a loyal friend of the human rights community, will long be remembered.

"A Victory for Freedom"

Blogger, philanthropist, and conservative activist Doug Wilson wrote today on TownHall.com about our recent lawsuit against Yahoo! "Democracy scored a huge victory earlier this month," said Wilson, when "Yahoo Inc., the Internet company made famous by their search engine, settled out of court with two Chinese journalists who sued the company under U.S. human rights laws for providing the Chinese government with identifying information about their Internet use."

Wilson continued, "Human Rights USA is an important organization whose good work expands far beyond the Yahoo case. Refugee women who want to spare their daughters from sexual abuse have earned the right to do so; the work of Human Rights USA directly resulted in the court decision that established that female genital mutilation qualifies as torture. Their work on another case set a precedent that the usual deadline to file asylum claims need not apply to sexual abuse victims with severe traumatic stress, who might hesitate to report such instances out of fear."

For the full blog post, click here.

MB

Yahoo Settles Internet Human Rights Case

Facing strong Congressional pressure and the threat of court-ordered discovery proceedings, Yahoo agreed to settle the lawsuit filed against it by Human Rights USA on behalf of internet users in China, who were jailed for exercising their free speech rights. This is the second major case in which a U.S. corporation has been held financially accountable, through a settlement agreement, for its involvement in human rights abuses. The other case was Unocal, which involved major human rights abuses by the oil and gas company in its construction of a gas pipeline in Burma.

The Yahoo lawsuit, filed in April, sought to hold the internet company accountable for its complicity in handing over identifying internet user information to Chinese authorities, which was used to arbitrarily arrest and detain two of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit -- well-known Chinese journalist Shi Tao, and pro-democracy advocate Wang Xiaoning. Both men have been subjected to abuse and torture while in prison. It is suspected that many more individuals have been similarly affected by the sharing of internet user information, including journalists and bloggers listed in two recent reports issued by Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists.

While the details of the settlement agreement remain private according to its terms and the parties' wishes, the issues raised in the course of litigation and in the Congressional hearing indicate some of the key points that were the focus of concern. These include the urgent need to secure, as soon as possible, the release from prison of Wang Xiaoning and Shi Tao; preventing further disclosure of internet user information that could lead to arbitrary arrest and torture; and the need to aid other prisoners who have been jailed as a result of the disclosure of identifying internet user information.

The resolution of the case by settlement agreement is not a perfect solution. Human Rights USA would have preferred that the court make specific findings, on the record, about the unlawful nature of Yahoo's actions, and that the case reach a final judgment that would be legally enforceable by the court. However, the plaintiffs and their families, along with Congress, felt strongly that immediate action was needed to secure the release of the prisoners, particularly given the five years it would take to bring the case to an end, which would have extended beyond the prison sentences that the two plaintiffs are serving.

This settlement agreement highlights the fact that U.S. corporations must pay greater attention to the consequences that their actions have on human rights, and that they will be held accountable for participating in, or aiding and abetting, major human rights abuses.

The agreement should also provide incentive for Congress to adopt the Global Online Freedom Act, a statute which, if passed, would prohibit U.S. internet companies from disclosing identifying internet user information to repressive governments that are likely to use such information to put a clamp on free speech and free press rights. This law would also provide U.S. companies with additional justification for not complying with government requests for this type of information, where compliance would result in the imprisonment or torture of individuals for repressive purposes.

Congress Asks Yahoo to Apologize to HRUSA's Clients

In a hearing on November 6, 2007, Rep. Lantos, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, urged Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang to apologize to Wang Xiaoning and Shi Tao, two of Human Rights USA's clients, for handing over their identifying internet user information to Chinese authorities, which led to their arrest, detention, and abuse and torture while imprisoned. "I do not believe that America's best and brightest companies should be playing integral roles in China's notorious and brutal political repression apparatus," said Lantos.

Gao Qinsheng, Shi Tao's mother, and Yu Ling, Wang Xiaoning's wife, attended the hearing, sitting directly behind Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang and General Counsel Michael Callahan during their testimony. Human Rights USA filed suit against Yahoo in April 2007 for its complicity in handing over Wang's and Shi's identifying information to Chinese authorities. As reported by the New York Times, "Lawmakers demanded to know what Yahoo would do to help Shi's family and reacted with derision when neither Yang nor Callahan provided a concrete answer."

For additional news items on this issue, please see below:

• Los Angeles Times Front Page, Yahoo Taken to Task Over China, November 7, 2007
• ABC News, Congress Blasts Yahoo: Moral 'Pygmies', November 6, 2007
• Ars Technica, Congress unimpressed by Yahoo apology for China dissident e-mail testimony, November 6, 2007
• CNet News (reported live from Congress), Yahoo executives grilled by Congress over China policies, November 6, 2007
• CNet News, Democratic leader to Yahoo CEO: China policy is 'spineless', November 6, 2007
• IT World, Lawmakers rip into Yahoo over testimony on dissident arrest, November 6, 2007
• Techdirt, Congress Not At All Pleased With Yahoo's Explanation in Chinese Dissident Case , November 6, 2007
• The Inquirer, Yahoo "deceived" Congress after helping to convict Chinese dissident , November 6, 2007
• Washington Post, US Lawmakers Criticize Yahoo Officials, November 6, 2007
• Wired, Yahoo General Counsel: We'll Consider Settling Yu Ling Lawsuit, November 6, 2007

Major lawsuit filed by Human Rights USA against Yahoo! highlights the internet company's complicity in human rights abuses in China

Yahoo! is quickly learning that the cost of doing business in China is not free. Unfortunately, this lesson is already all too familiar to Chinese citizens like Wang Xiaoning who, thanks to the complicity between Yahoo! and the Chinese government, face increasing threats to their rights to free speech and association, not to mention other fundamental human rights such as the right to freedom from torture.

On April 18th, Wang Xiaoning filed suit against Yahoo! Inc. and its subsidiaries for their role in aiding and abetting torture abuses against Chinese journalists and human rights advocates in China. In 2002, Wang was arbitrarily detained and subsequently arrested by Chinese authorities for having written and published articles advocating for democracy and a multiparty system in China. His arrest was made only after Yahoo!’s Chinese subsidiary handed over Wang’s identification to the government. By turning over identifying information of its customers, Yahoo! is enabling acts of torture, forced labor, and arbitrary and prolonged detention to occur. As a result, Wang Xiaoning and others like him now sit in prison for having done nothing more than exercise their free speech rights.

Above, Wang's wife, Yu Ling, holds a copy of the Chinese court's judgment against her husband, which cites Yahoo's complicity in sharing with Chinese authorities Wang's anonymous e-mail information. Wang is now serving a 10-year sentence for having expressed pro-democratic views via his Yahoo! e-mail account and Yahoo! Groups, and has suffered abuse and torture at the hands of Chinese officials during his imprisonment.

The Chinese government, as a condition of allowing foreign internet companies to access its market by hosting internet servers in China, requires that foreign companies agree to turn over identifying information of internet users, block access to certain websites, and prevent internet users from being able to search certain words, like “freedom.” The identification information turned over by internet companies is used by the Chinese government, as it was in Wang Xiaoning’s case, to repress individuals who advocate for democratic reforms and greater human rights protections in China by subjecting them to arbitrary arrest, long-term imprisonment, and torture.

In 2005 – three years after Wang’s arrest – Yahoo! Inc. partnered its Chinese subsidiary, Yahoo! China, with the Chinese internet company Alibaba.com, and granted Alibaba the right to use its brand name. This move represents Yahoo’s attempt to gain access to the up-and-coming internet market in China, while trying to shield itself from liability for violating international human rights standards by distancing itself from China’s operations. Yet Yahoo! retains substantial organizational control over its China subsidiaries. By disregarding the rights of their Chinese customers, Yahoo! only facilitates the Chinese government’s repressive practices.

The American public has become increasingly perturbed by the negative social impact that U.S. enterprise can have on individuals in other countries. Perhaps the most notable example of the public outcry against corporate involvement in human rights abuses is the U.S. House of Representatives hearing in 2006, in which Yahoo! and several other U.S. internet companies were brought before the House to explain their complicity with the Chinese government’s censorship policies. Congressman Tom Lantos likened Yahoo!’s actions to the corporations that contributed to the atrocities of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany.

The lawsuit against Yahoo! and its subsidiaries by Wang Xiaoning and his wife, Yu Ling, underscores the dire need for U.S. corporations to put human rights and international law first in all of their business dealings, especially when operating in countries like China that commit torture and other major human rights abuses on a systemic basis.

With increasing attention being given to the business practices of U.S. companies, this lawsuit ought to convince other U.S. companies to think twice before doing business with the Chinese government, especially when ‘doing business’ means placing people at peril of their lives. U.S. companies would do well to remember that corporate profit does not justify human rights abuses.

Download the complaint here.

Laura Sydell's interview with Yu Ling on NPR is available here.
Bo Hill's interview with Morton Sklar on Radio Australia is available here.

Additional reporting available at:

AP
CBS 5 (Sunnyvale, CA)
The Independent (UK)
Jurist Paper Chase
LA Times
NBC 11 (San Francisco)
NY Times
Reuters
San Francisco Chronicle
Washington Post
Yahoo! News

CC