Chris Smith (R-NJ) Writes China’s Privacy Law

Posted on October 30, 2007
Filed Under Apparatchiks, China Business, China Internet, GFW, Security |

From PC Pro (hat tip to China Venture News):

The “Global Online Freedom Act of 2007″ was introduced by Republican Chris Smith in the wake of last year’s allegations that Yahoo had handed information to the Chinese government which had led to the arrest of two Chinese dissidents, an accusation vehemently denied by the company.

Specifically the bill seeks to “prohibit US internet companies from cooperating with repressive regimes that restrict information about human rights and democracy on the internet and use personally identifiable information to track down and punish democracy activists.”

The Bill was filed in January of this year and CNet writes that it recently passed by a voice vote by the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the US House of Representatives. The Bill was driven by Google’s acquiescence with China’s demands for filtered search results and Yahoo and Microsoft’s revealing of personal blogger information to the Chinese authorities. Congressman Smith’s description of the Bill can be found here.

Related to the Yahoo case, the Committee will hold hearings next week on Yahoo’s misleading testimony on the information they revealed to the Chinese government about blogger Shi.

The scope of the proposed law is quite broad and essentially makes the Department of Justice the chief privacy officer for American internet firms in China. The text of the law can be found here.

The Bill establishes an Office of Global Internet Freedom (OGIF) in the Department of State. It’s charter is to identify countries that impede global internet freedom, document what they’re blocking, and collect reports from companies who operate in those countries.

The Department of Justice is charged with assessing whether requests for this kind of data from foreign governments are for legitimate law enforcement.

The president may issue a waiver for a country based on the broad definition of “important national interest of the United States”.

American companies are forbidden to locate personal user information in countries that are “not free”, they must provide the OGIF with all the filtering triggers and site blocking requested or required by those countries.

An interesting note is that the definition of an American company includes “…any issuer of a security registered pursuant to section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78l)”. That would include such big Chinese internet firms such as Baidu and Sina. I can’t imagine they’re going to be happy about this.

Penalties for breaking the law by providing user information to countries targeted by the Bill:

The law also calls for a feasibility study on imposing export controls for countries that do not meet OGIF standards. Countries already identified are: Belarus, Cuba, Ethiopia, Iran, Laos, North Korea, China, Tunisia, and Vietnam.

Organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Reporters Without Borders have publicly supported the Bill and have called for its passage into law.

If this gets passed it would represent a significant victory for the glass-half-empty approach to internet freedom, at least in China. I firmly believe in the protection of private information, on the internet and elsewhere. But I’m reluctant to demand that other countries share my values. Indeed, Mr. Smith would do better to spend more time investigating the illegal wiretaps on American citizens rather than imposing a code of conduct on firms’ operations in China and elsewhere.

The article had little reaction from the US firms most caught up in this: Yahoo, Google, and Microsoft. I would assume that the Bill is not quite on their radar yet. You can be sure it will be. It puts them in a very awkward position. Sina, Baidu, and the other US-listed firms will also find themselves in a tight spot.

I don’t know how this will play out, but you can be sure the lobbyists are going to make a mint on it.

And if does get passed, will President Bush use his suddenly active veto pen?