Government Technology

    Digital Communities
    Industry Members

  • Click sponsor logos for whitepapers, case studies, and best practices.
  • McAfee

China Relaxes Computer-Filter Edict



June 16, 2009 By

When Chinese government authorities mandated that computers sold in that country must contain the government-approved Green Dam Youth Escort filtering software, it created suspicion in the West as to its real purpose, and widespread  objections in China. Was it to prevent children from accessing pornography, or to extend official censorship into the home and office?

Then, Global Internet Freedom (GIF) -- a consortium formed by a few technology companies specialized in circumventing political censorship on Internet by repressive regimes -- released "Green Tsunami," software designed for Chinese users to disable or get rid of Green Dam.

Next, Solid Oak, a U.S.-based software manufacturer sent legal "cease and desist" orders to some U.S. computer manufacturers to stop them from installing the Green Dam software, claiming copyright infringement.

Then, security vulnerabilities were found and the Chinese Ministry of Industry and Information Technology reportedly ordered the Green Dam manufacturer to install security patches.

Finally, yesterday, China Daily reported that while manufacturers must still install the Green Dam software on computer hard drives or have it available on installation CDs, consumers are not required to use it.

Photo: by Peter Morgan. Creative Commons License Attribution 2.0


| More

Comments

Sadien, Inc.    |    Commented June 17, 2009

Making the software available, and allowing people to freely choose to use the software, if so desired, is a step in the right direction. However, the entire situation still reeks of conflict and ulterior motives. The government is still mandating that an oppressive software package, that is potentially infringing on numerous copyright laws, and could be used to censor and control the population's access to all types of information, be distributed on all computers sold to its citizens. I would like to leave everyone with one legal question, that everyone should be asking... Why would a government force the distribution of content censoring software, that is intended solely to "protect children from pornography"... on ALL of its people... including those citizens WITHOUT children?? In these modern times, it seems every group with a self-serving agenda, uses a "it's all about the children" guise, to further their cause... The worst part of this methodology, is that these campaigns cheapen, and undermine those operations that truly do work to further the best interests of children.

Sadien, Inc.    |    Commented June 17, 2009

Making the software available, and allowing people to freely choose to use the software, if so desired, is a step in the right direction. However, the entire situation still reeks of conflict and ulterior motives. The government is still mandating that an oppressive software package, that is potentially infringing on numerous copyright laws, and could be used to censor and control the population's access to all types of information, be distributed on all computers sold to its citizens. I would like to leave everyone with one legal question, that everyone should be asking... Why would a government force the distribution of content censoring software, that is intended solely to "protect children from pornography"... on ALL of its people... including those citizens WITHOUT children?? In these modern times, it seems every group with a self-serving agenda, uses a "it's all about the children" guise, to further their cause... The worst part of this methodology, is that these campaigns cheapen, and undermine those operations that truly do work to further the best interests of children.

Sadien, Inc.    |    Commented June 17, 2009

Making the software available, and allowing people to freely choose to use the software, if so desired, is a step in the right direction. However, the entire situation still reeks of conflict and ulterior motives. The government is still mandating that an oppressive software package, that is potentially infringing on numerous copyright laws, and could be used to censor and control the population's access to all types of information, be distributed on all computers sold to its citizens. I would like to leave everyone with one legal question, that everyone should be asking... Why would a government force the distribution of content censoring software, that is intended solely to "protect children from pornography"... on ALL of its people... including those citizens WITHOUT children?? In these modern times, it seems every group with a self-serving agenda, uses a "it's all about the children" guise, to further their cause... The worst part of this methodology, is that these campaigns cheapen, and undermine those operations that truly do work to further the best interests of children.


Add Your Comment

You are solely responsible for the content of your comments. We reserve the right to remove comments that are considered profane, vulgar, obscene, factually inaccurate, off-topic, or considered a personal attack.

In Our Library

White Papers | Exclusives Reports | Webinar Archives | Best Practices and Case Studies
Digital Cities & Counties Survey: Best Practices Quick Reference Guide
This Best Practices Quick Reference Guide is a compilation of examples from the 2013 Digital Cities and Counties Surveys showcasing the innovative ways local governments are using technological tools to respond to the needs of their communities. It is our hope that by calling attention to just a few examples from cities and counties of all sizes, we will encourage further collaboration and spark additional creativity in local government service delivery.
Wireless Reporting Takes Pain (& Wait) out of Voting
In Michigan and Minnesota counties, wireless voting via the AT&T network has brought speed, efficiency and accuracy to elections - another illustration of how mobility and machine-to-machine (M2M) technology help governments to bring superior services and communication to constituents.
Why Would a City Proclaim Their Data “Open by Default?”
The City of Palo Alto, California, a 2013 Center for Digital Government Digital City Survey winner, has officially proclaimed “open” to be the default setting for all city data. Are they courageous or crazy?
View All