We applaud the direction of the secretary of state in establishing the Global internet Freedom Task Force. This embraces the government-to-government approach that Yahoo has been urging.
We are looking into the report. We would not know the nature of an investigation.
Yahoo Inc. is continuously seeking to expand and deepen our global footprint in countries such as Korea. As such, we are currently not involved in any discussions to sell Yahoo Korea.
Yahoo Hong Kong was not involved in any way in the disclosure of information in Mr Tao's case.
making money and a person going to prison for expressing their viewpoint.
to enhance the user experience and compliance with our terms of service.
Just like any other global company, Yahoo! must ensure that its local country sites must operate within the laws, regulations and customs of the country in which they are based.
Our goal is to help drive the discussion between U.S. companies with our government. This is a government-to-government issue. We believe the executive branch of the U.S. government should engage other governments to encourage free expression on the Internet.
We intend to be a leader in this dialogue and hope our peers in the communications, media and Internet will join us.
We did not provide any personal information in response to the Department of Justice's subpoena.
We are rigorous defenders of our users' privacy. We did not provide any personal information in response to the Department of Justice's subpoena. In our opinion, this is not a privacy issue. We complied on a limited basis and did not provide any personally identifiable information.
We are rigorous defenders of our users' privacy. In our opinion, this is not a privacy issue.
Yahoo will continue to strongly support law enforcement in their work, as well as continue to provide support for several non- profit organizations committed to online safety.
Yahoo takes security very seriously and employs measures to help protect our users. Upon learning of this issue, we immediately began working on a number of improvements, some of which are already in effect.
The facts surrounding the Shi Tao case are very distressing to Yahoo. We learned the depressing facts on the case through the press.
We only responded with what we were legally compelled to provide and nothing more. We had a vigorous process in place to make sure that only required material was provided.
We condemn punishment of any activity internationally recognized as free expression whether that punishment takes place in China or anywhere else in the world.
We would not know whether that demand for information is focused on murder, kidnapping or another crime.
While we absolutely believe companies have a responsibility to identify appropriate practices in each market in which they do business, we also think there is a vital role for government-to-government discussion of the larger issues involved.
We are unaware of this case and are currently looking into the matter.
We are vigorous defenders of our users' privacy. We did not provide any personal information in response to the Justice Department's subpoena. In our opinion this is not a privacy issue.
These efforts are consistent with and build upon our long-standing commitment to providing a safer and more secure online experience for consumers.
Companies that choose to enter the market in the future will face the same struggle to effectively balance what they believe which laws they must obey.
As in most jurisdictions, governments are not required to inform service providers why they are seeking certain information and typically do not do so.
This embraces the government-to-government approach that we've been urging.
It's an issue that we take very seriously, and the facts surrounding the Shi Tao case are very distressing to us.
It's not a matter of whether to ignore the law, but whether to leave.
The choice in China and other countries is not whether to comply with law enforcement demands for information. Rather the choice is whether to remain in the country.
In our opinion, this is not a privacy issue. We complied on a limited basis and did not provide any personally identifiable information.
All U.S. and international firms operating in China face the same dilemma of complying with laws that lack transparency and that can have disturbing consequences inconsistent with our own beliefs.
