U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) today released the following statement on the settlement between Yahoo! and the families of pro-democracy activists who have been jailed by the Chinese Government after Yahoo! turned over information on them:

    “Convening a Congressional hearing every time a US company helps put a human rights activist in jail should not be their only means of securing justice. For that reason, today’s settlement underscores a million times over why it is important to give the families of victims like Shi Tao standing in US courts. The Global Online Freedom Act will ensure that right.”

    “As I said during our recent hearing, settling this case in a manner that is generous to the victim’s families would be a positive gesture from Yahoo and will hopefully bring some comfort to the families of Shi Tao and Wang Xiaoning for Yahoo’s part in the incarceration of their loved ones.”

    “However, as a nation, we have a responsibility to continue to push for the release of these human rights leaders and pass the Global Online Freedom Act to prevent this egregious human rights abuse from happening to others. Much like the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, my legislation will make certain that US companies are not compelled to comply with local Secret Police or any other unlawful policies when operating in foreign markets.”

    “At the hearing, Yahoo General Counsel Michael Callahan said the company would look into settling this lawsuit. True to his word, they did and I commend them for taking this step in the right direction.”

Background

    During a November 6, 2007 House Foreign Affairs hearing, Smith pressed Yahoo! Chief Executive Officer Jerry Yang and Senior Vice President and General Counsel Michael Callahan to settle the pending lawsuit.

    “Settling the case would be a good step forward. And you should settle with them generously in favor of the families. It can never make things whole, but it would be an important gesture. That would be one way that you could convey to the committee and the American people and especially the victims that there are true victims because of your complicity. You can settle that tomorrow or by the end of the week if you’d like to,” Smith told the Yahoo! executives during the hearing.

    “We absolutely will consider that,” Callahan said in response.

    Callahan’s remarks came as the company took considerable heat from Committee members for their practices in China that have led to the arrests of Chinese pro-democracy activists and their misleading testimony about their actions in the case of incarcerated Chinese journalist Shi Tao at a hearing Smith convened in February 2006.

    Yahoo! settled the case with the victims’ families today. The terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

    Smith is the author of the “Global Online Freedom Act of 2007” (H.R. 275) which will strengthen the federal government’s new strategy to promote online freedom by prohibiting U.S. 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 would make it a crime for Internet companies to turn over personal information to governments who use that information to suppress dissent.

    Additionally, the “Global Online Freedom Act of 2007”:

• Creates a private right of action for individuals aggrieved by the disclosure of such personal identification to file suit in any US district court;
• Prohibits US internet service providers from blocking online content of US government or US-government financed sites;
• Establishes a new interagency office within the State Department charged with developing and implementing a global strategy to combat state-sponsored internet jamming by repressive countries;
• Requires the new Office of Global Internet Freedom to monitor filtered terms; and to work with Internet companies and the non-profit sector to develop a voluntary code of minimum corporate standards related to Internet freedom;
• Requires Internet companies to disclose to the new Office of Global Internet Freedom the terms they filter and the parameters they must meet in order to do business in Internet Restricting Countries;
• Requires the President to submit to Congress an annual report designating as an “Internet Restricting Country” any nation that systematically and substantially restrict internet freedom;
• Establishes civil penalties for businesses (up to $2 million) and individuals (up to $100,000) for violations of the new requirements;
• Mandates a government feasibility study to determine what type of restrictions and safeguards should be imposed on the export of computer equipment which could be used in an Internet Restricting Country to restrict Internet freedom.