Shi Tao, jailed on Yahoo-information

internet - Differences between the Yahoo and Microsoft cases

Asiapundit continues the discussion on the role of IT-companies (no clue why only US-based ones are included) and points at differences between Yahoo (who caused the conviction of journalist Shi Tao) and Microsoft (who eliminated the weblog of journalist Michael Anti), both on the request of Chinese authorities.
The difference is that Yahoo employees had no clue what they did when they handed over their information, while Microsoft willingly complied with murky Chinese ideas about what a state-secret is. Microsoft deleted the weblog on their US-based server and there could only be a political and no judicial argument for that act.
For the time being I stick to my argument: since there is not reason to run internet services that might be a political liability inside China, it simply makes sense to host those services outside the country, even Hong Kong would be fine. Companies like Yahoo can know they will be required under circumstances to help to jail journalists and others for nothing else but for informing others. I agree that we enter legally very dodgy terrain when companies like Microsoft accept Chinese interference outside China, but still feel Yahoo should not be off the hook.
More arguments and links at Asiapundit.