Resultados 1 a 3 de 3
  1. #1
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    18,492

    [EN] China’s Internet Controls Will Get Stricter

    New law is part of a broader set of policy steps to streamline regulation of the internet

    Officials say the rules will help stop cyberattacks and help prevent acts of terrorism.

    Individual users will have to register their real names to use messaging services in China.

    By PAUL MOZUR
    November 7, 2016

    HONG KONG — In August, business groups around the world petitioned China to rethink a proposed cybersecurity law that they said would hurt foreign companies and further separate the country from the internet.

    On Monday, China passed that law — a sign that when it comes to the internet, China will go its own way.

    The new rules, which were approved by the country’s rubber-stamp Parliament and will go into effect next summer, are part of a broader effort to better define how the internet is managed inside China’s borders.

    Officials say the rules will help stop cyberattacks and help prevent acts of terrorism, while critics say they will further erode internet freedom. Business groups worry that parts of the law — such as required security checks on companies in industries like finance and communications, and mandatory in-country data storage — will make foreign operations more expensive or lock them out altogether. Individual users will have to register their real names to use messaging services in China.

    Restrictions on the flow of data across borders “provide no security benefits but will create barriers to Chinese as well as foreign companies operating in industries where data needs to be shared internationally,” James Zimmerman, chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, wrote in an emailed statement.

    He added that by creating such restrictions, China risked isolating itself technologically from the rest of the world.

    But in many ways, the regulations are not likely to have a major impact on much about how business is done. Most of the rules are already in effect, but not codified. Other parts are vague enough that the government will determine their meaning on the fly.

    The law, however, is an important statement from Beijing on how the internet should be run: with tighter controls over companies and better tracking of individual citizens.

    Calling it a “basic law,” Chen Jihong, a partner at the Zhong Lun law firm in Beijing, said the rules were set up to deal with the growing number of legal issues regarding the Chinese internet and to seek to strike a balance between privacy and security.

    “The law only stipulates principles; it would take follow-up laws or interpretations to specify the standards,” he said.

    Human Rights Watch said on Monday that it was concerned about several aspects of the law, including that it calls for real-name registration for users of Chinese instant messaging services.

    “The already heavily censored internet in China needs more freedom, not less,” the group’s China director, Sophie Richardson, wrote in a statement. “Despite widespread international concern from corporations and rights advocates for more than a year, Chinese authorities pressed ahead with this restrictive law without making meaningful changes.”

    The final law did soften a few elements. In particular, a second draft of the law said foreign businesses did not need to keep all of their data inside China — just important business data collected within China or about Chinese consumers.

    For years the government has been working to ensure that people’s real names are linked to their online activities. Beijing has also long restricted many types of online content, from pornography to political discussion.

    Foreign companies have at times dealt with the controls detailed in the new law. For example, during the past two years, American tech companies have had products subjected to government security reviews that target encryption and data storage. Beijing also distributed a pledge to American companies last year asking them to vow to respect Chinese national security and to store data within the country.

    The law is also part of a broader set of policy steps to streamline regulation of the internet. Analysts say the regulations seem to indicate that the Cyberspace Administration of China, a relatively new regulatory body created during President Xi Jinping’s tenure, ultimately is in charge of setting the agenda.

    Last year China passed a national security law that called for technology that supports crucial sectors of the economy and government to be “secure and controllable.” Industry groups say that language means companies can be forced to allow third-party access to their networks, provide encryption keys or hand over source code.

    After the state news media announced the law’s passage, comments on Chinese news and social media sites were largely censored.

    On one news app run by the internet company Tencent, some users applauded the law as a way for China to crack down on internet fraudsters and the less savory parts of the web. Others wondered what the cost of that security would be.

    “I hope this won’t be a law that does more to limit freedom of speech,” wrote one user under the screen name Leisa Wenzhou.

    http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/08...gulations.html

  2. #2
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    18,492

    China introduces "sincerity" as a legal standard in Hong Kong

    MICHAEL FORSYTHE and ALAN WONG
    NOV. 6, 2016

    The Chinese government effectively barred two young, pro-independence politicians in Hong Kong from taking seats in the territory’s legislature on Monday, an extraordinary intervention in the affairs of this semiautonomous former British colony that could prompt a constitutional crisis and incite more street protests.

    The move came in the form of a rare interpretation of the charter that governs Hong Kong, which was negotiated before the territory’s return to Chinese rule in 1997, and raised questions about the independence of the city’s courts. The charter gives China’s Parliament the right to issue such rulings, but Beijing has never before done so in a pending case without a request by the local government or judiciary.

    The two politicians, who were elected in September, had changed the wording of their oaths of office, inserting what many consider to be a derogatory term for China and setting off a legal case here on whether they should be allowed to retake their oaths. Anticipation of Beijing’s move sent thousands of demonstrators into the streets on Sunday night. Hundreds clashed with the police in a scene reminiscent of the large pro-democracy demonstrations in the city in 2014.

    People’s Daily, the flagship newspaper of the Communist Party, had painted the two politicians, Yau Wai-ching, 25, and Sixtus Leung, 30, known as Baggio, as threats to national security for their advocacy of independence and their use of the word “Chee-na” in their oaths, a term that many find offensive and was used by the Japanese during World War II.

    That China has taken such a drastic action over what many people see as the childish behavior of two young people has stoked fear that the city’s autonomy will be further compromised. Until two years ago, Ms. Yau was an administrative assistant at a trade group for accountants.

    “If we do not suppress and crack down on Hong Kong independence in time, it will seriously undermine national sovereignty, security and development interests,” said Li Fei, the chairman of China’s parliamentary committee on Hong Kong’s charter, the Basic Law. Speaking to reporters in Beijing, he added that the government’s stance “will not be ambiguous or lenient.”

    Mr. Li used incendiary language to describe Mr. Leung and Ms. Yau, comparing them and their supporters to “traitors” espousing a “fascist” line.

    “There is a great patriotic tradition in the Chinese nation,” Mr. Li said. “All traitors and those who sell out their countries will come to no good end.”

    The ruling on Monday by the Communist Party-controlled Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress represents a clash of mainland China’s authoritarian legal system with the rules-based government that Hong Kong inherited from Britain, and it appears to introduce a vague political loyalty test for local officeholders.

    The decision requires lawmakers to read their oaths “completely and solemnly” exactly as written. Those who alter the words of their oaths or deliver them in an “insincere or undignified manner” will not be allowed to retake them and will be barred from office, according to a copy of the interpretation published by Xinhua, the state-run news agency.

    The decision also says lawmakers will be held liable if they violate their oaths but provides no guidance on who has the power to determine whether a lawmaker is in breach or what the punishment should be.

    “What has been framed as an ‘interpretation’ to bolster the ‘rule of law’ in reality imposes subjective political criteria,” Alvin Cheung, an affiliated researcher at the U.S.-Asia Law Institute of New York University, said in an email. “The surface may appear to be rule-based, but the substantive test of fealty to Beijing undercuts everything else.”

    The oath of office for the legislature includes a vow of allegiance to “the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China.” But a small but growing independence movement has adopted a slogan declaring, “Hong Kong Is Not China.”

    In a scene that resembled the enormous pro-democracy demonstrations of 2014, the police used pepper spray on Sunday to push back hundreds of protesters gathering after nightfall around the Chinese government’s liaison office in Hong Kong. After midnight, officers in riot gear began clearing the area of protesters, some of whom were shouting, “Hong Kong independence.”

    After the ruling, Hong Kong’s political establishment fell into line. The city’s unpopular chief executive, Leung Chun-ying, said he supported the interpretation and vowed to enforce it “fully,” saying, “This is about the country’s unity and sovereignty.”

    But many people in Hong Kong’s pro-democracy camp, which posted big gains in the local legislature in the September elections but now may see those gains nullified by Beijing, said the ruling was a large step back for the rule of law. A big concern was the apparent power that the ruling gives to the pro-Beijing president of the Legislative Council, or whoever administers oaths, to determine what constitutes loyalty.

    Another concern is that other newly elected lawmakers in the 70-member council who have supported self-determination or outright independence may also face expulsion under the new interpretation. Six other lawmakers are loosely grouped into the so-called localist camp that generally backs a stronger Hong Kong identity and greater autonomy.

    “Are legislators still allegiant if they call for amendments to the Basic Law, accountability of the Tiananmen massacre or an end to one-party rule?” asked Nathan Law, another pro-democracy lawmaker swept into office in September who supports more self-determination for Hong Kong. “It’s letting the Communist Party undo Hong Kong’s election results at will.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/wo...wai-ching.html

  3. #3
    WHT-BR Top Member
    Data de Ingresso
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    18,492
    Do post da Centurylink:

    "In China, there are a lot of customers deploying a colocation environment in Hong Kong that’s directly tethered to an environment in China where they could deploy virtualized resources. In case anything goes wrong, such as a geo-political event, they can pull the virtualized environment back to Hong Kong."

    Pelo visto, deve ser considerado manter um Plano C -- c de Cingapura

Permissões de Postagem

  • Você não pode iniciar novos tópicos
  • Você não pode enviar respostas
  • Você não pode enviar anexos
  • Você não pode editar suas mensagens
  •