back to article US judge revives lawsuit vs Baidu and China

A US judge has revived a potentially significant anti-censorship lawsuit brought by Stateside pro-democracy activists against Chinese search giant Baidu and the People’s Republic of China. The original complaint was filed by eight New Yorkers back in 2011 in the US District Court in Manhattan. They claimed Baidu, in collusion …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
FAIL

Huh ?

The US constitution only applies to the US government. It doesn't apply to private companies.

1
0

Re: Huh ?

Much more importantly, it does not apply to foreign governments or foreign companies. However US judges have long had the opinion that the US owns the world ...

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Huh ?

I beg to differ. Companies (as well as the government, itself, and generally anyone geographically residing) inside the borders of the United States and its territories are bound by either contracts with the government or the Constitution. The Constitution very much applies to the states (demonstrated with the Civil War, in spite what some states-rights proponents may think). Companies actually have more rights than citizens, as they cannot be imprisoned for illegal activities (they should be forbidden from selling product or services as an alternate sanction).

0
0
Silver badge
Meh

Exportation of Laws to other countries?

I think the reply from the Chinese Government will be a simple 'go fcuk yourself'.

1
0
Silver badge
Meh

Seems

It doesn't matter where you live, what nationality you are you will be subject to American Law, even if you have broken no laws in the country of your residence.

The only country that has shown any backbone and has said no to them recently has been New Zealand.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Huh ?

@ac 0706 you can beg to differ but you would be wrong. The constitution spells out the mechanisms and limits of government. Your contracts are known as laws and yes they do (obviously) apply to persons and companies. The constituion however only limits the power and reach of government. You have rights under the constituion but you have no obligations.

Now as to the suit in question. They're claiming a breach of the first amendment. This will be dismissed at the first hurdle because there is nothing in the constitution requiring either individuals or companies to respect free speech.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Larsg et al. Baidu has a US presence and therefore may be legitimately sued in the US under US law. What you can't do tho', is sue them for violating the constitution because that isn't a crime.

1
0
Bronze badge
WTF?

WTF?

Disclosure: I am against any 'net filtering when not requested by an individual user, for *that* individual user.

Let me get this straight:

A non-USA company not residing in the USA is not producing results that USA companies like. So the USA companies sue this non-USA company in a USA court under USA laws?

Hmmm.... tell you what - how about a couple of lobbies outside of the USA, where there are strict gun-ownership laws, start suing the NRA, US gun manufacturers and USA.gov because there are websites in the US promoting "irresponsible gun ownership". How well do you think that'd go down in the US?

'Merkins!

4
0

Re: WTF?

Given Baidu has a US presence (a research office in Cupertino), one would assume that gives the US authority to sue them within the US.

0
0

Re: WTF?

You haven't been following the UK libel laws closely then? There have been a huge number of libel cases in the UK in recent years where a plaintiff not based in the UK can be sued by someone also not based in the UK for libel just because an article may be accessed from the UK. It's legal tourism and it's not much different from this. Google for "justice eady" to see what's been going on - its fair to say he's a maverick.

0
0
Gold badge

Hahaha ..

"Baidu couldn't immediately be reached for comment."

I saw what you did there :)

0
0
Silver badge

They missed a chance.

The Chinese Premier was on US soil recently. They could have had him arrested and imprisoned, pending due process and legal costs.

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: They missed a chance...could have had him arrested and imprisoned,

Which would have caused a international shit storm guaranteed to make the current NSA spying scandal "child's play" by comparison.

If that were ever to occur, no future President or former President would ever be able to safely leave the country, because they risked arrest somewhere offshore. Don't you think that several countries would like to have "arrested" Bush if they could??? Obama would never take that foolish chance.

1
0

Re: They missed a chance...could have had him arrested and imprisoned,

I think it was a little joke buddy

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums