BooYahoo!

Google Makes Good

2010-01-12T15:32:00.000-08:00

And I knew they would eventually.

Cyber attackers in China were fiddling about in the e-mail accounts of gmail users who are known China human rights activists.

This is leading to them reconsidering their business relationship with China.

Nice move, Google.

Another Yahoo! Boycott site

2008-07-07T12:49:00.000-07:00

They are of like mind: www.BoycottYahoo.com

I wish there were a hundred such sites!

In the meantime, lots of news about Yahoo! has been circulating. They are in financial trouble, and will likely be purchased by one of the bigger players in an attempt to increase market share.

The boycott will be revisited if Yahoo! is purchased, depending on the stated policies of whoever buys them.

Chinese Protesting Internet Censorship

2008-02-04T14:06:00.000-08:00

This article indicates that a groundswell of protests are starting to crop up in China. It is an encouraging article, but also enlightening as it indicates that many Chinese citizens were not aware of how much censorship they were suffering.

Perhaps if some other company buys Yahoo! (which now seems likely), the new owners will be aware of this trend in China and change Yahoo!'s policies.

Yahoo! In the News

2008-01-30T18:13:00.000-08:00

They say in England that if you wait long enough for a train, two will come at once.

So it is with Yahoo! news.

First, Yahoo!'s stocks are falling to a point lowe than they have been in over four years, and they are laying off 1000 workers. Hopefully they will jettison the people who turn over the names of Yahoo! users to the Chinese government.

Second, the Full Transcript of Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing on Yahoo! and China has been posted here. It is aptly titled "Yahoo! Inc.’s Provision of False Information to Congress," and includes testimony from Yahoo! CEO Jerry Yang and General Counsel Michael Callahan. The hearing was called following the committee’s conclusion that Yahoo! officials provided false information to Congress in early 2006 regarding its role in a human rights case in China that sent journalist Shi Tao to jail for a decade.

I'm sure these two events are unrelated, but there seems as if the universe is handing out its own justice.

Yahoo! Pays Up

2007-11-14T17:48:00.000-08:00

A week after lawmakers shamed its executives as moral "pygmies," Yahoo Inc. on Tuesday reached an out-of-court settlement with the families of two Chinese journalists thrown into jail for dissidence after the company disclosed their identities to local police.

The LA Times' lead sentence does a good job of summing up the situation.

Calling them moral pygmies, however, is actually a disservice to pygmies.

On the Hotseat Again

2007-11-06T18:34:00.000-08:00

In February of last year, Yahoo!'s General Counsel Michael Callahan told a government panel he didn't have any knowledge of the facts surrounding why Chinese authorities approached Yahoo China with a request for identifying information about Shi.

Turns out he did.

"... the legal order did, in fact, specify that Shi was suspected of leaking "state secrets."

"He added that he sincerely regretted not updating the committee with that information when, in October of last year, the details of the Chinese government order were finally brought to his attention."

I find it hard to believe he went before a government panel without fully investigating the facts he would be questioned on.

Just more evidence for why we should boycott Yahoo!

UPDATE: Thanks to Helge Kraak, who has assembled quite a bit of footage and research on this topic at his website here, you can view the footage of this hearing in Real Video format. Check out the November 8th update on his site.

We're Back

2007-09-05T12:48:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the interruption. We had some technical difficulties gave Booyahoo a new and very unwanted "look." Apologies to those of you who did not find what you expected.

This site has not been very active, but as news occurs regarding Yahoo! and it's unsavory international policies, you can read about it here.

Human Rights Group Sues Yahoo!

2007-04-19T15:37:00.000-07:00

The source article can be found here.

NEW YORK (AP) -- A human-rights group sued Yahoo Wednesday on grounds the U.S. search company assisted China's communist government with torture by revealing information that led to the arrest of dissidents.

The World Organization for Human Rights USA is seeking unspecified damages and wants Yahoo to actively secure the release of any detainees.

The group said businesses that operate abroad need to be more aware of their responsibilities.

"They should not be participating actively in promoting and encouraging major human-rights abuses," said Morton Sklar, executive director for the Washington, D.C.-based organization.

Yahoo has acknowledged turning over data on its users at the request of the Chinese government, saying company employees face civil and criminal sanctions if they ignore local laws.

Without commenting directly on the federal lawsuit the human-rights group filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, Yahoo spokesman Jim Cullinan said such a matter is "better suited for diplomacy than it is in the legal forum."

He said that although company officials are "distressed that citizens in China have been imprisoned for expressing their political view on the Internet," Yahoo plans to keep offering services in China out of a belief the Internet can promote change and transform lives in that country.
Dissidents reluctant to join complaint

The lawsuit cites federal laws that govern torture and other violations of international law. Plaintiffs included jailed dissident Wang Xiaoning and his wife, Yu Ling, who was visiting San Francisco this week as part of the group's campaign.

Sklar said he knew of three other cases, but the dissidents were reluctant to join the complaint for fear of harm to their families living in China. Among those three dissidents is journalist Shi Tao, who was sentenced in 2005 to 10 years in jail.

Part of the lawsuit's goal will be to determine how widespread Yahoo's assistance was, Sklar said, "and to stop this practice of U.S. corporations being complicit."

Yahoo rivals Microsoft and Google also have been accused of helping the Chinese government crush dissent in return for access to booming Internet markets, but only Yahoo has been accused of directly assisting in a dissident's arrest.

Google has offered a censored version of its popular search engine, while Microsoft shut down, at Beijing's request, a popular Chinese blog that touches on sensitive topics such as press freedoms.

Activists, meanwhile, have criticized Cisco Systems for selling computer-networking equipment that could potentially be used to monitor Internet use.

The Great Firewall of China

2007-03-14T13:38:00.000-07:00

A terrific website has been set up called "The Great Firewall of China." A tip of the hat to Todd to pointing this site out to me.

It allows you to see what sites are currently blocked within China, and you can test any URL. Test yours! It's fun! It wasn't much of a surprise to see that BooYahoo! has been blocked.

ReBang

2007-03-01T08:24:00.000-08:00

Google launches ReBang in China.

Another step in the right direction for Google. To quote the article:

"But why is this not hosted on Google.cn?

Because doing so would mean that Rebang would fall under Chinese legal jurisdiction and since not all people who search for Chinese language terms on Google live in mainland China, Google Rebang should show a more transparent and honest view of what people are searching for in Chinese."

I wonder if this site will be legally accessible by people in mainland China?

Positive Momentum

2006-12-14T12:55:00.000-08:00

This press release just came to me from Reporters Without Borders:

______________________________

YAHOO! AND GOOGLE ASKED TO RESPECT FREE EXPRESSION IN SHAREHOLDER RESOLUTION FILED BY NEW YORK CITY PENSION FUND

Reporters Without Borders voiced support today for a shareholder resolution about freedom of expression that has been filed with Yahoo! and Google by the New York City Pension Fund, which owns around 400 million dollars of stock in the two companies.

"More and more initiatives are being taken by individual shareholders and investment funds to force Internet companies to respect certain ethical principles when operating in repressive countries," the press freedom organisation said. "The New York City Pension Fund's involvement is excellent news because it is an investor with both financial and symbolic weight."

Reporters Without Borders added: "We call on all shareholders in Yahoo! and Google, both individuals and management companies, to vote in support of this resolution at these companies' next annual shareholders meetings."

The shareholder resolution (full text below) was announced today by New York city comptroller William C. Thompson. The city's pension fund, which mainly handles the retirement funds of city employees, owns 687,244 shares in Google worth 276 million dollars and 4,372,277 shares in Yahoo! worth 110 million dollars.

The resolution sets out a series of principles to be respected by Internet companies, especially when operating in the "13 countries that restrict and monitor information." The resolution names the same countries that appear in the list of 13 "Internet enemies" which Reporters Without Borders published in November.

The resolution affirms that: "Technology companies in the United States that operate in countries controlled by authoritarian governments have an obligation to comply with the principles of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights."

Reporters Without Borders has for several years been urging investment funds to take action in support of online free expression. At the organisation's initiative, 30 investors signed a statement in 2005 about the moral responsibilities of Internet sector companies.

Similar initiatives:

A resolution calling on Cisco Systems to produce a report on his activities in repressive countries was backed by 29 per cent of shareholders in a vote at the company's annual shareholders meeting on 15 November.

Individual shareholders have filed a shareholder resolution on freedom of expression with Yahoo! Like the one filed by the New York City Pension Fund, it will be put up for vote at the company's next annual shareholders meeting.

Coup Yahoo!?

2006-12-06T08:44:00.000-08:00

A Wired Blog quotes former Yahoo! executives saying that there are big problems (other than moral compromise) at the internet giant.

The sentiment is to unseat Terry Semel, the CEO. This would make way for another leader who might possibly take a more forthright stand against the unethical acts of oppressive governments.

Reporters Without Borders 24-hour Protest

2006-11-07T17:24:00.000-08:00

In a 24-hour protest against what they are calling "Internet Black Holes," Reporters Without Borders is asking that you Combat Censorship by joining them in sending a message to Jerry Yang, the founder of Yahoo!

Their timing is in somewhat of a conflict for the attention of Americans, who are fixated on the mid-term election, but please take a moment and click the link. This is important!

Race to the Bottom

2006-08-16T08:37:00.000-07:00

Human Rights Watch (hrw.org) has just published an excellent report on Corporate Complicity with Chinese Censorship called "Race to the Bottom."

Their number one offender, is Yahoo!, and their offenses are listed here.

It starts with a statement of Yahoo!'s "Our Core Values":

“Our mission is to be the most essential global Internet service for consumers and businesses. How we pursue that mission is influenced by a set of core values - the standards that guide interactions with fellow Yahoos, the principles that direct how we service our customers, the ideals that drive what we do and how we do it… We are committed to winning with integrity. We know leadership is hard won and should never be taken for granted… We respect our customers above all else and never forget that they come to us by choice. We share a personal responsibility to maintain our customers' loyalty and trust.”

Then the article goes on to list Yahoo!'s heinous offenses against Human Rights--especially their own customers--amid their clamor for capital.

Michael Anti is well-known as the blogger who was censored by Microsoft, but he has this to say about Yahoo!:

After being censored by Microsoft’s MSN Spaces (details in following section on Microsoft), Chinese blogger Zhao Jing, a.k.a. Michael Anti, wrote that the Chinese people were probably still better off that Microsoft’s MSN and Google were engaged in China despite their compliance with Chinese censorship.82 However he had no such feelings for Yahoo!: “A company such as Yahoo! which gives up information is unforgivable. It would be for the good of the Chinese netizens if such a company could be shut down or get out of China forever.”83 He was even more blunt in an interview with the New York Times: “Yahoo is a sellout,” he said. “Chinese people hate Yahoo.”84 Such opinions are examples of the way in which Yahoo!’s behavior in China is viewed by Chinese intellectuals and opinion-leaders concerned with free speech issues.

Brilliant Idea from Amnesty

2006-07-20T12:13:00.000-07:00

Dan Raphael just forwarded me an e-mail from Amnesty. (I'm not sure why I didn't get it, since I'm a member).

Amnesty has started irrepressible.info. This idea is sheer brilliance. It mobilizes freedom of speed advocates on the internet to give censorship the exact opposite of its desired effect.

Here's how they describe their mission:

"The web is a great tool for sharing ideas and freedom of expression. However, efforts to try and control the Internet are growing. Internet repression is reported in countries like China, Vietnam, Tunisia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria. People are persecuted and imprisoned simply for criticising their government, calling for democracy and greater press freedom, or exposing human rights abuses, online.

"But Internet repression is not just about governments. IT companies have helped build the systems that enable surveillance and censorship to take place. Yahoo! have supplied email users’ private data to the Chinese authorities, helping to facilitate cases of wrongful imprisonment. Microsoft and Google have both complied with government demands to actively censor Chinese users of their services.

"Freedom of expression is a fundamental human right. It is one of the most precious of all rights. We should fight to protect it."

The cause has a method to participate by creating a feed that displays censored text on thousands upon thousands of participating web pages everywhere. It's so brilliant it makes me want to laugh and cry simultaneously. Every now and then I discover a page and it's "love at first sight." This was one of those times.

Please check it out and participate. You will see some additions here soon!

Divesting from Yahoo!

2006-07-06T10:40:00.000-07:00

The following is some encouraging news from Reporters Without Borders. Freedom of Speech should be aligned with venture capital--especially when the company in question deals primarily in communications.

This is fantastic news. Read on, and let's cross our fingers that AP3 will make the right move.

_______________________________
AP3 may disinvest in Yahoo!

IPE.com 6/Jul/06: GLOBAL - The roughly SEK175.8bn (¤19.2bn) Third Swedish National Pension Fund (AP3) has not ruled out withdrawing its equity investment in Yahoo! following reports implicating the global online network in human rights violations.

The move could see the scheme disinvest close to 300,000 shares.

"That's too early to say [whether AP3 will disinvest its shares], but something we will discuss depending on the outcome of the dialogue," a scheme spokesperson told IPE.

In a letter to Yahoo! at the end of June, AP3 requested dialogue with Yahoo! following reports from its socially responsible investment provider about allegations that Yahoo! supplied information leading to the detention of Chinese journalist Shi Tao.

According to news sources, Yahoo! allegedly cooperated with China's state security authorities, which ultimately led to Tao receiving a 10-year jail sentence for sending information about a Communist Party decision through his Yahoo! email account to a US-based website.

"We consider the reported associations as highly worrying due to our investment in Yahoo!," wrote AP3 corporate governance head Pernilla Klein.

The scheme's ethical investment policy - based on international agreements signed by Swedish government - strives to avoid investment in companies that breach these norms.

"The Third Swedish National Pension Fund has a firm belief that companies have a responsibility to respect human rights wherever they operate," said Klein.

"In light of this, we would like to discuss your policies and programmes in place, and more specifically their reference to human rights, in order to evaluate Yahoo's efforts to prevent any future occurrences of this kind. We would also be interested in discussing other possible steps Yahoo! may have taken to prevent complicity to violations of human rights."

AP3 told IPE that it has yet to hear from Yahoo!. Meanwhile, Yahoo! did not respond to requests for comment from IPE.

According to Julien Pain, head of the Internet freedom desk at press freedom group Reporters Without Borders, "It's important that this Swedish fund launched this initiative."

Pain was speaking against the backdrop of a joint investor statement on freedom of expression and the Internet launched by Reporters Without Borders late last year.

Under this initiative, some 32 investment funds and financial analysts with roughly ¤19bn in assets under management have stated they are committed to online freedom of expression, and will monitor the activities of Internet sector companies in repressive countries.

These include the Calvert Group, Boston Common Asset Management, Belgian-based Ethibel, and French-based Meeschaert Asset Management.

The targeted companies are Yahoo!, Google, Microsoft, Cisco Systems, Secure Computing and Fortinet.

According to Pain, while signing up to the statement is an important first step, "we are also asking them to move forward and write letters to the CEO's of these companies as this Swedish fund did [AP3], and also draft shareholder resolutions".

"We want more funds involved. Not only to sign on the statement but also take action," said Pain. He added: "We would like to have more mainstream investment funds on board because obviously they carry more weight."

Later today in a plenary session, the European Parliament is scheduled to debate on cases of breaches of human rights, democracy and the rule of law regarding the freedom of expression on the Internet.

Yahoo! Declared the Worst of the Worst

2006-06-17T06:58:00.000-07:00

Once more, Reporters Without Borders is on the mark. They did some research and determined that Yahoo! is the worst offender when it comes to censorship.

Please assist in the Boycott by signing the petition! (Link on the right.)

New Kid on The Search Engine Block

2006-05-16T13:24:00.000-07:00

Amazon has a pretty good search engine.

For those of us who are feeling like avoiding Google, MSN and (of course) Yahoo!, try http://a9.com.

Hopefully Amazon hasn't, and won't, fall prey to the same corruption of its competitors.

A Match Made In ....

2006-05-03T14:56:00.000-07:00

There's talk that Yahoo! and Microsoft may be merging.

This will pose no tough moral quandary.

Fourth Yahoo User Behind Bars

2006-04-28T06:53:00.000-07:00

This just in from Reuters.

Wang Xiaoning, born in 1951, was convicted of the charge of "incitement to subvert state power" after e-mailing electronic journals advocating a multi-party system.

I feel confident that the number of Yahoo! jailings will grow for some time. Yahoo users are truly in a deal with the devil.

Boycott Yahoo! They cannot continue to profit from freedom-loving people.

Our suspicions on Jiang Lijun

2006-04-19T15:45:00.000-07:00

They are confirmed by Reporters Without Borders.

Yahoo! denies it.

Yahoo!'s spokeswoman Mary Osako also said Wednesday, "We condemn punishment of any activity internationally recognized as free expression, whether that punishment takes place in China or anywhere else in the world. While we absolutely believe companies have a responsibility to identify appropriate practices in each market in which they do business, we also believe there is a vital role for government-to-government discussion of the larger issues involved."

So basically they are saying it is tue government's issue to solve. In the meantime, it looks like there may be many more names that surface in the near future that are in prison due to Yahoo!'s assistance.

So if it's the government's job to fix the problem with China, it is the consumer's job to Boycott Yahoo! in the meantime.

Click on the "Sign the petition" link on the right to do that.

Tank Man

2006-04-11T21:46:00.000-07:00

Frontline is premiering a new documentary tonight called "The Tank Man," the story of the courageous man who risked death and stood in front of tanks approaching Tienanman Square in 1989.

It's worth watching, and shows the string of tragedies that have befallen China. Similar tragedies are--in subtler ways--happening in other countries as well. A populace that is stupified by wealth is quick to forget the atrocities it just lived through, and those that are currently happening just behind the glamour and lights.

They mentioned Shi Tao, and talked about Yahoo! at length. It reminds us why we should boycott Yahoo!

Let's not forget.

UN Advancements

2006-03-15T17:51:00.000-08:00

The United Nations has, in the past, only been as credible as its member countries are. So for the UN to stand up against Human Rights abuses would be somewhat ineffectual, since many of its member states are flagrant abusers of human rights.

But this may be changing. Reuters reports that the UN is setting up a Human Rights Council—of which only some of its member states may be a member.

Will Saudi Arabia care if it’s not invited into the Human Rights Council? Will Zimbabwe? Will this serve as pressure to those nations to change their policies? Will it potentially divide what is intended to be united?

Why did the United States vote against the proposal?

We’ll see.

More of Shi Tao's writing ...

2006-03-10T14:48:00.000-08:00

I just found this here.

The following essay illuminates some of the backstory into the arrest and imprisonment of Shi Tao. He was an obvious iconoclast, and extremely courageous in his criticisms. It's clear to see why he was disliked by the "tigers" in China. It is words like these they were attempting to silence. By republishing them here, I'd like to emphasize how this strategy will backfire.

Mr. Shi, after you're released from prison (In 2014), I'd love to have a beer with you!

__________________________________

Flies and Tigers, Fish and Bicycles –
Some Thoughts on Reading "A Harbinger of History" (part 10 of 10)
Author: Shi Tao
Translated by Roberta Raine

Apparent progress in freedom of the press in China is ultimately illusory given the absolute power of the authorities to revoke it at any time.

"Kill flies but don't kill tigers[1]" — this is a "commandment" strictly adhered to by those in the news industry in mainland China. Everyone knows that tigers should not be provoked, that one should not slap a tiger on its rump, whereas killing flies is very easy and gives one a great feeling of accomplishment. The news industry coexists peacefully together with tigers without a problem, but the more it swats at flies, the more numerous the flies become. With tigers, if you feed and take care of them, they get fatter and reproduce at an alarming rate. Tigers work together in groups, as if with one breath, while news agencies hardly dare take a breath, much less make a stink, and they are forced to keep their resentment towards tigers to themselves.

Not long ago, an anonymous young writer in this province who held the position of editor of a newspaper supplement gave this kind advice to several friends at the newspaper: "They (referring to the leadership of news agencies, as well as leaders in other types of fields; in other words, all kinds of tigers) are so powerful and so strong, you really don't want to provoke them." He was not yet 30 years old, but he spoke such a depressing "truth." It really makes one feel sad for these poor bastards — all the poor writers, journalists and editors in (mainland) China. Sure, tigers are scary and sure, you wouldn't want to try to kill one, but can't one at least shout at them? In a newspaper office, one may not dare swear or shout abuse, but can't one swear and complain while out eating and drinking with a few friends? If he doesn't have that much integrity, I'm afraid that even the flies he kills won't respect him.

In A Harbinger of History, there is an editorial from the Communist Party of China's Xinhua Daily dated March 30, 1946 entitled "A Single-Party Dictatorship Would Spell Disaster." The article pointed out that under Kuomintang rule, unspeakable disasters were occurring throughout the country. And yet, just a few years later under Communist Party rule, not only did natural disasters increase more and more, but human misfortunes also increased year by year at an unprecedented rate. There was so much tragedy in the human world, even the gods were angry! Awful precedents were set during that time of human misery, and the news media certainly can't avoid taking some of the responsibility for that. For example, on January 5, 1970 the "Tonghai Earthquake" struck Yunnan Province. It measured 7.7 on the Richter scale and killed 15,621 people, nearly as many as were killed during the great Tangshan Earthquake. However, the detestable "single-Party dictatorship" had its mouthpiece, the Xinhua News Agency, issue only one short, simple statement on the earthquake to the outside world. It said not a single word about the situation in the disaster area, and it even downplayed the magnitude of the earthquake on the Richter scale. As a result, the "single-Party dictatorship" adopted a closed policy towards international disaster relief, and domestic relief efforts were mainly aimed at providing "spiritual aid" with the result that, after the earthquake the disaster area was sent tens of thousands of copies of Quotations of Mao Zedong and tens of thousands of badges bearing the portrait of Mao Zedong from all over the country. As for the material and financial assistance that was so urgently needed, the amount given was pitifully small.

Although compared to the "Cultural Revolution," today's news media is able to "kill flies" — which is progress, historically speaking - is this progress really so great? Today's press has the freedom to "kill flies," but the tigers can, after all, deprive them of this one very small freedom at any time; they can revoke at will the pitiful right to "kill flies." There is an editorial in A Harbinger of History that states that "limits on free speech and publication make people ignorant" and "whether it's a democracy or dictatorship, there is no such thing as free speech." However, the news media in these advanced, modern times still vigorously works to kill flies as much as possible, still vigorously promotes "the Three Represents[2]" and still sings the praises of Jiang Zemin's core group of leaders. The news media is thus surely more repulsive than flies!

Recently, the whole country has been awash in propaganda about the "Three Represents," with one wave after another until it reached a climax. What is incomprehensible is that even well-known writers, scholars and certain other well-known personages have also been talking at great lengths about the benefits of the "Three Represents." It seems as if everyone has been inhaling some sort of mental opium and talking utter nonsense! In the middle of the 1980s, there was a popular expression in the UK among feminists that a woman needed a man like a fish needed a bicycle. Paraphrasing this, we could say that the "single-Party dictatorship" needs the "Three Represents" like a man needs a woman. But when we talk about the sad state of "freedom of the press," to say that the news agencies need the "Three Represents" is just as absurd as a fish needing a bicycle, isn't it?

Gorky once said, "if you put a man in a pigpen but expect him to become an angel, it's a foolish expectation." By the same token, to expect the ideology of the "Three Represents" to guide the way for the news media, or to expect someone who is good at killing flies to be molded into a "hero at killing tigers," is equally foolish. Moreover, given the current state of freedom of the press, freedom of publishing and freedom of assembly, to place our hopes in all the different tigers, or to place our hopes in the "single-Party dictatorship," or to place our hopes in the "Three Represents" — now that would really be the height of foolishness!

[1] Flies are used metaphorically here to refer to low-level officials in China, while tigers refer to high-level officials in positions of power.

[2]The "Three Represents" is a theory first put forth by Jiang Zemin in 2000 to guide the future development of the country and Party. It states that the CPC must always represent the three most productive parts of Chinese society: the development of advanced productive forces, the orientation of China's advanced culture, and the fundamental interests of the Chinese people.

Shi Tao Poetry

2006-03-09T10:10:00.000-08:00

Found here:

Shi Tau is now in a force-labor prison camp in China because Yahoo! revealed his identity to Chinese authorities.

Pain

The portrait on the wall has lost its powers of reflection,
yet the wind at my window cannot stem this violence.
I torment you through one long night of passion
till we're both completely spent - two kites left in the rain.
Once, long ago, I was the star of a children's play.
Once, long ago, I used both my hands to teach children to sing.
Once, long ago, I heard two crows conversing, lit by the moon.
But the brute fact of cruelty
struck me down. Pain lacks the tenderness of moonlight.
Struggling, trapped in an iron box full of lies, I try to be a model patient,
to swallow a spoonful of spite down the throat of the motherland.

Heretical Theories

Take one mad cow and daub it with paint
so that passers by can get 'closer to nature'.
Let the Great Leader's statue sprout rabbit's ears
so that he can hear the non-stop protests.
Take one politician and one wild beast
and throw them in a cage together.
Make Barbie scrub the stairs.
Let cigarettes go wild in women's lips.
Love is just a corny song:
Everybody Knows.
The machine that runs the body
is just a blind bulb.
The streets reek of casual encounters -
nostalgic flesh recoils suspiciously.
Desire scars,
poisoning the body.
Let green sing like a bird again.
If only this shriek of anguish could become
a happy journey. If only stricken Superman
could come down to witness my crimes.

© Shi Tao

· Translated by Sarah Maguire and Heather Inwood

No Response from Yahoo!. No Changes Either.

2006-03-08T12:03:00.000-08:00

My e-mail sent on 2/28 has not yet been responded to.

Also, I have found a February 15th statement given by Michael Callahan (Yahoo!'s Chief Counsel) to a Global Human Rights Subcommittee.

In that statement, Yahoo! tries to exhonerate itself of it's involvement in the Shi Tao case (and a growing number of other cases) by stating that Alibaba.com is has day-to-day operational control over Yahoo! China. This deal was inked in October of 2005, long after Yahoo! put Shi Tao in jail.

Here's a quote: "When we receive a demand under law enforcement authorized under the law of the country in which we operate, we must comply."

Tell that to Google, as they are apparently unaware of the rigid standard. Arguably, Google has more to lose by denying the government in its country of origin than Yahoo! would have in denying the Chinese Government.

Callahan corrects the media that Yahoo! Hong Kong was involved. Apparently they were not. This removes what was believed to be a legal loophole that Yahoo! could have used. Apparently that loophole was not available, but it does not remove Yahoo!'s etchical responsibility in this matter at all.

Basically, Yahoo! isn't going to change anything. Unless the government or a "Collective Action" spurs them on to change their policy, our boycott will need to continue.

Smoking Gun on Li Zhi

2006-02-28T13:26:00.000-08:00

Reporters Without Borders has published the Chinese Transcripts here.

Yahoo! Notified of 500 Petitioners

2006-02-28T11:11:00.000-08:00

Well, 503 to be exact. The spreadsheet has been sent to David Filo and Jerry Yang with the following letter:

Dear Mr. Yang and Mr. Filo,

Attached please find a spreadsheet of 500 people who have signed the petition on www.booyahoo.com. These people have all publicly stated that they are boycotting the use of some or all of Yahoo's services as a direct result of the abuses to the rights of humans that Yahoo! has taken part in.

For a company that has millions and millions of subscribers, 500 people might seem a trifle. But these 500 people are all actively angry at Yahoo's actions, and are actively involved in alerting others. Imagine a large auditorium filled with 500 people who are angry at what your company has done, and have refused to use your services. What would you say to them? I certainly hope you would not relegate their concerns to an auto-reponse engine that searches for key words in the complaint and spits out an irrelevant and illogical reply. That is what has happened in the past, and it has only helped to nurture our ill feelings toward your organization.

Yahoo's Chief Council, Michael Callahan, was recently quoted as saying, "We always reserve the right to get better."

Speaking on behalf of 500 petitioners, Mr. Yang and Mr. Filo, I'd like to ask that you exercise that right.

Get better, Yahoo!. Change your policy that dictates how Yahoo! response to requests for identities of your anonymous users from oppressive governments--especially when those governments have a history of using the information you give them to imprison people merely for dissagreeing with a local government.

Petition Status

2006-02-27T11:46:00.000-08:00

We're nipping at the heels of 500 signatures. When we've reached that benchmark, I'm going to send another letter to Yahoo!

If you haven't signed the petition, and have chosen to boycott any or all of Yahoo's services as a result of their bad policies that have resulted in the imprisonment of cyber dissidents, please sign the petition, which is linked at the column on the right.

And a heartfelt thanks to those of you who have already signed!

Yahoo!'s Chief Council's E-mail Box is Suddenly Full Again

2006-02-27T08:58:00.000-08:00

Yahoo! has reversed its decision to ban the use of "allah" in e-mail handles. The letters a-l-l-a-h were, for a time, not being allowed in any e-mail names.

While many believe this reversal to be a response to pressures from the general public, it's quite possible that the pressure came from within--namely their Chief Council ... Michael Callahan.

Redirect Yahoo Surfers with this Script!

2006-02-24T11:20:00.000-08:00

This ingenius little script came to me via Delirio & Kaos, and I must admit I'm impressed.

Here's what it will do: If someone uses Yahoo!'s search engine to find your blog, the link from Yahoo! will take them to their requested page, but it will put a table at the top of the page that explains how Yahoo! is helping China put cyber-dissidents in jail, and it offers a passive invitation to find out more and take part in the boycott.

Note: I'm *not* using it on this site, as it would be redundant. But to see an example, do a Yahoo search for "Meat of the Matter" and click on the first link. That blog is using this code, and you'll see what it does.

Blogger won't allow some of the following code to appear in the body of a blog posting, so please follow these simple instructions:

1. Copy the following code:

<br /><script type="text/javascript"> if (document.referrer.split('/')[2].indexOf('.yahoo.')!='-1') {  <br />document.write('<div style="text-align: center;">'); <br />document.write('<TABLE style="background-color:#3CAC94; color:white;" border="1"> <tbody><tr><td valign="top" width="40%">'); <br />document.write('<div style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Yahoo sign" src="http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/2821/yahoo200x1603ia.jpg">'); <br />document.write('</div>Yahoo headquarters, Sunnyvale, California.<br>'); <br />document.write('(C) AP GraphicsBank</td>'); <br />document.write('<td valign="top" width="60%">Dear Yahoo user,<br><br> Yahoo! is helping the Chinese Government put cyber-dissidents in jail. '); <br />document.write('(Source: <a href="http://www.booyahoo.com">BooYahoo</a>)<br><br>'); <br />document.write('In response to this, I am asking all the surfers that come here through a Yahoo search '); <br />document.write('engine, to join the BooYahoo boycott to pressure Yahoo into modifying its policy regarding '); <br />document.write('human rights in China and wherever it operates. '); <br />document.write('</td></tr></tbody></table></div><br><br>'); } </script><br />

2. Then go to this site: http://centricle.com/tools/html-entities/ and paste the code into the field, and click "decode."

3. Copy the code again into your blog template just below the "body" tag (except it has <> around it instead of quotes). Save, and you're good to go!

Thanks Delirium & Kaos!

Complete Version of The Global Online Freedom Act of 2006

2006-02-22T13:12:00.000-08:00

Today I found a much more complete version of this bill. It does include direct language to the issue that compelling us to boycott Yahoo!.

Particularly, page 5, line 21 reads:

(14) United States technology companies have succumbed to pressure by authoritarian foreign governments to provide such governments with information about Internet users that has led to the arrest and imprisonment of cyber dissidents, in violation of the corporate responsibility of such companies to protect and and uphold human rights.

Then, on page 24, line 10:

Section 206 Integrity of User Identifying Information (a) User Protection. - Any United States business that maintains an Internet content hosting service may not provide to any foreign official of an Internet-restricting country information that personally identifies a particular user of such content hosting service, except for legitimate foreign law enforcement purposes as determined by the Department of Justice.

(b) Private Right of Action. - Any person aggrieved by a violation of this section may bring an action for damages, including punitive damages, or other appropriate relief in the appropriate district court of the United States, without regard to the amount in controversy, and without regard to the citizenship of the parties.

(Page 25) Sec. 207. Penalties (a) Civil Penalties. - (1) Any United States business or United States person that violates section 206(a) shall be fined not more than $2,000,000. ...

(Page 25, Line 9) (b) Criminal Penalties. - (1) Any United States business that willfully violates, or willfully attempts to violate section 206(a) shall be fined not more than $2,000,000, or if a natural person who is an officer, director, employee, or agent of a United States business, or stockholder acting on behalf of such United States business, shall be fined not more than $100,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

This bill, if passed, would have a remarkable effect on the very issue that BooYahoo is boycotting. My only concern is that the US Government determines which countries to which this law will be applied--and it is unlikely that the US Government would ever name itself as an internet-restricting country. The law would be more effective if enforced by an international body ... but that is an issue for a different blog.

Shi Tao Countdown

2006-02-22T10:11:00.000-08:00

A contributor who wishes to remain anonymous (thank you!) has submitted a counter under Shi Tao's picture. This shows how many days of imprisonment Shi Tao has left.

I also created a counter for the other two known Yahoo! victims. If anyone locates a picture of Li Zhi or Jiang Lijun, please send them!

For those interested, you can simply cut-and-paste the following code and add it to your website's template for the Shi Tao portion:

Thanks!

Kristof's Article Translated into Hebrew

2006-02-21T17:07:00.000-08:00

Kristof's article was translated into Hebrew and made available free to the public on the Haaretz website. This link comes from Shamai Leibowitz. Thanks!

BooYahoo Goes Live?

2006-02-21T12:30:00.000-08:00

I have a tentative invitation from the nice people at "GoDaddy Radio" to appear on their show tomorrow night. Here's the information for their live broadcast:

XM Satellite Radio - XM 152
152 Extreme 7pm-8pm PT

Sirius Satellite Radio - 117
Advice 7pm-8pm PT

KBNP/Portland - AM 1410
7pm-8pm PT

The roster is apparently pretty full, they may not have time for me to take part in the show, but they will be discussing the internet's involvement with Human Rights abuses in China. Lucy Morillon from "Reporters Without Borders" will be there!

Victim No. 3

2006-02-19T13:25:00.000-08:00

The bad news in Mr. Kristof's article this morning was finding out that Yahoo! had helped the Chinese government put a 3rd dissident behind bars.

This Salon article explains that Jiang Lijun was sentenced to 4 years for attempting to set up a Democratic Liberal party (and allegedly planning a fake bomb threat, which I am sceptical of) based on evidence supplied by Yahoo!.

The article also informs us that Shi Tao is being forced to work in a jewelry factory, has lost weight, and is not allowed to write.

Hat Tip to Nicholas D. Kristof ...

2006-02-19T08:19:00.000-08:00

... for mentioning BooYahoo in his op-ed piece in the New York Times today. Unfortunately, it's not available free online.

In his article, he gives his opinion on the height of moral outrage that Yahoo!, MSN, and Google should inspire. He concludes that Yahoo towers over the other two--and with that I heartily agree. He also offers a hopeful message (with statistics) of how the internet's presense in China is actually making a profoundly positive effect.

Thanks Mr. Kristof!

(FYI, the shorter address of www.booyahoo.com will work as well.)

Global Online Freedom Act of 2006

2006-02-16T07:35:00.000-08:00

The new law, if passed, will make it unlawful to turn over information about users to certain governments unless the U.S. Justice Department approves. This would solve the basic problem being protested by BooYahoo. This website would potentially go away, or morph into something else. It doesn't mean that the basic nature of Yahoo! will have changed; it would only mean that their ability to do severe damage to their customers will be made illegal and would undoubtedly stop. If that happens, this boycott would be rendered effete.

Here is a complete draft of the law. I haven't read it yet, but I fear it may solve one problem and create another. Namely, as the article states, the powers of this bill are apparently broadly defined.

However, Reporters Without Borders' Lucie Morillon offers a glimmer of hope. "Our first reaction would be that hopefully this hearing and all this congressional and media attention is going to push the companies themselves at some point to regulate themselves ..."

I hope you are right, Ms. Morillon, because there is a certain irony to a Congressional Bill with "Freedom" in the title. Freedom cannot be legislated. It exists naturally, and legislation can only curb freedoms.

One portion of the bill prohibits censorship as dictated by an "internet restricting country," but continues to allow censorship as dictated by the US and its friends. While these few censored items may seem justifiable now, there is some degree of certainty that in the future, unjust censorship will occur.

However, Google's Elliot Schrage, who is someone I can't help but like, is cautiously agreeing to the bill.

UPDATE: After reading this bill, I am left with a very large question mark over my head. The language is extremely broad, and does nothing specific other than appropriate funds to technology that prevents internet jamming, and set up an office of Global Internet Freedom, which will "implement" a "comprehensive global strategy" to combat internet jamming and persecution by a named list of 10 repressive governments.

Apparently much of the conversation with the Big 4 yesterday was hypothetical.

US Feds Will Govern Those Who Would Not Govern Themselves

2006-02-15T10:43:00.000-08:00

From left, Mark Chandler of Cisco, Elliot Schrage of Google, Jack Krumholtz of Microsoft and Michael Callahan of Yahoo at the hearing today.

In a New York Times article today by Tom Zeller, Jr., a House Subcommittee plans to introduce legislation by this weekend that would restrict an Internet company's ability to censor or filter basic political or religious terms. The legislation would also establish standards for internet companies operating abroad. Whether these standards include the criteria required to reveal an anonymous e-mailer’s identity to a foreign government was not specified.

In another Tom Zeller article, Republican Christopher Smith of New Jersey offered some harsh criticisms for US-based Internet companies for “sickening collaboration" with the Chinese government and for "decapitating the voice of the dissidents" there. California Democrat Tom Lantos also said, "I do not understand how your corporate leadership sleeps at night." Well said, Mr. Smith and Mr. Lantos!

"We always reserve the right to get better," Mr. Callahan, Yahoo's general counsel, said in a phone call last weekend. Way to stand up for your rights, Mr. Callahan!

While this may sound like an encouraging development, it does not necessarily bode well for the future of freedoms currently enjoyed by internet users. Since these four companies (Yahoo!, Google, MSN, and Cisco) did not govern themselves when dealing with China, it is becoming apparent that they may have to answer to a higher authority with regard to how they will do business abroad, and ultimately in the US as well.

Today, the US Government is inserting its legislation into the internet world in what appears to be a very positive manner. However, this may subject industry leaders to future legislation that is not so positive.

No government is beyond reproach, and the US government has specifically been under fire lately for its apparent lack of concern for personal privacy and civil rights. The warrantless wiretapping of phones has been at the forefront of several news cycles, but what has slipped by practically unnoticed is that these thousands of intrusions have included warrantless monitoring of e-mail as well. Is this the governing body we want guaranteeing the freedom of internet users in the US and abroad?

If the US Government has appointed itself the official policeman over the internet, shame on the Big-4 internet companies for letting it happen.

Yahoo! Seeks Help

2006-02-12T18:48:00.000-08:00

This is a promising development.

At least they are admitting that there is a problem.

Stay tuned.

2nd Victim

2006-02-09T12:37:00.000-08:00

It was reported in Reuters today that Li Zhi, a Chinese writer and activist, was sentenced to 8 years in prison in China after Yahoo! revealed his identity to Chinese authorities.

Reporters Without Borders has called upon Yahoo! to reveal the names of all the cyberdissidents whose identities they have revealed to the Chinese Secret Police. "The firm says it simply responds to requests from the authorities for data without ever knowing what it will be used for. But this argument no longer holds water. Yahoo certainly knew it was helping to arrest political dissidents and journalists, not just ordinary criminals. The company must answer for what it is doing at the US congressional hearing set for February 15."

Li is a 35-year-old ex-civil servant, and was sentenced on December 10, 2003 to eight years in prison for "inciting subversion." He had been arrested the previous August after he used an online discussion group to criticize the corruption of local officials. According to one website, Mr. Li has Hepatitis B in jail, and his condition is worsening.

According to Reporters Without Borders, 49 cyberdissidents and 32 journalists are in prison in China for posting on the Internet articles and criticism of the authorities.

How many of these wrongfully imprisoned were rooted out with Yahoo!'s help?

Please, help us by boycotting Yahoo! This organization needs to change this despicable practice.

(Note: The picture I posted was of another man with a very similar name, who was alos a prisoner of conscience in China. If anyone can locate a picture of Mr. Li, I would appreciate it.)

Amnesty Intervenes

2006-02-01T16:12:00.000-08:00

Amnesty, International has called upon Yahoo! to use its influence with China to help free Shi Tao from prison.

I seriously hope Yahoo! complies with this, but I've grown pessimistic. Yahoo! would have to change its policy first, or be in a constant error loop of trying to influence China to release people they've helped imprison.

The article also has a form letter that they are asking people to send to the Yahoo! brass.

I'm sending it.

Need Counter Help

2006-01-27T12:51:00.000-08:00

I got an idea from the comment made by TheForester in my last post.

As of today, January 27, 2006, Shi Tao has been imprisoned for 272 days. He has 3378 days in prison to go before he is freed.

If someone can help me attach a counter to Shi Tao's picture, with some text explaining what the counter is, you would officially reach *rock star* status.

Can anyone do this, or explain to me how?

Boycotts Don't Start With Someone Else

2006-01-27T08:38:00.000-08:00

I got a nice e-mail from "The Analyst," who is also calling for a boycott of all three ISPs who are censoring the web in China. He links to this article which I find quite interesting. The Bloomberg journalist paints a broad picture of the problem of censorship--one which I generally agree with. The title of the blog, however, says that the "Chinese Should Boycott Microsoft and Yahoo."

Take note that in the world of journalism, the authors are not always the same people who write the headlines of their own articles. So Mr. Pesek may not have written that headline, and the contents of the article say "I'd like to see the country's consumers boycott Yahoo, Google, Microsoft and others." There may be a disconnect between what the author intended and his headline.

But the bottom line is this: there should be no qualifier of who should boycott. Everyone, everywhere should boycott Yahoo! (and possibly MSN now), because the internet has no borders. We are all citizens of the internet (aka: "netizens") and furthermore, we all vote with our dollars and our choice of products.

To call upon the Chinese to Boycott is to say the issue is not important to you right here, right now.

More Google Support

2006-01-27T08:16:00.000-08:00

This BBC journalist is standing behind Google. He adds some additional reasons why Google's move in China was justified.

It had not occured to me that American laws may have penalized Google for not going in to China.

A Silver Lining?

2006-01-26T08:14:00.000-08:00

Yes, it's a black day for China since Google announced it would self-censor search results in order to make Beijing happy.

Bloggers around the world, myself included, have dog-piled the criticism onto the ISP provider. But after a good night's sleep and further research into this news, there are a few glimmers of hope.

The first is actually a pyrrhic victory--specifically for BooYahoo! Namely, Google has agreed to Beijing's demands on censorship, but has withheld its e-mail, messaging, and blogging services "because of concerns the government could demand users' personal information." This scores points for Google, as those services represent a major portion of their offerings, and will hurt their market share in China considerably.

Furthermore, when a Google-search is censored, the search results will allegedly indicate that the topic is restricted. This is, in another small way, a fairly respectable compromise. When a user searches for "Taiwan independance," the results will inform the user that their government has restricted them from getting any information on that topic--but that more information is out there. The Chinese are just as enterprising as anyone, and nothing makes me more curious than a topic that I'm not supposed to find out about.

So, I'm reeling in my criticisms of late last night. I will wait and see, with my fingers crossed.

Google Flip-Floogle

2006-01-25T22:59:00.000-08:00

As news of Google's capitulation with China darkens my mood. I find semi-sweet relief in finding that the US Government may step in.

Google's bowing to the Chinese makes it apparent that their "Highly pricipled" approach to doing business was the worst kind of hypocricy. It was just marketing spin. This makes it all-too appropriate for their race for cash to be possibly curtailed by the kings of spin: the US Government.

They could have policed themselves ... but businesses are like kids. They can't resist the cookie jar.

How to Oppress a Nation and Still Pretend to Be Free

2006-01-24T15:58:00.000-08:00

A hat-tip to Ontario Empoblog for this scoop. He ironically found this article while querying the word "freedom."

China is "cracking down on spam, viruses, and organized bawdry* online activities." To get there, they are legislating police supervision of all internet service providers. Not surprising.

I couldn't help but chuckle at the following sentence:
"The regulation also states that any online safeguarding technique should not be used to infringe upon the individuals' freedom and privacy and at least two members of the police should be at scene when inspecting suspects.
The Chinese are apparently becoming slightly aware of their image, but their attempt to inoculate against it is about as sophisticated as an episode of T.J. Hooker.

Sadly, this is more of the same regarding the Chinese aggression against personal liberties.

*I thought this wasn't a word, but apparently the words bawdy and tawdry got together and birthed bawdry, which means about the same thing.

Schadenfreude

2006-01-24T10:06:00.000-08:00

Yahoo! Inc. demonstrated its commitment to excellence yesterday by its bold proclamation to be #2.

"It's not our goal to be No. 1 in Internet search." Chief Financial Officer Susan Decker said in an interview. Basically, Yahoo is placing flowers at the feet of Google.

To boost future revenues, Yahoo! plans to beef up its "pay for advertising click" scheme. This scheme was deftly criticized in this month's Wired magazine.

Decker went on to give its shareholders the proverbial tin blanket of hope: "We have held our own," Decker said in the interview after the company reported earnings last week.

A New Level of Boycott

2006-01-23T12:22:00.000-08:00

After sending a note of thanks to Jesus' General, I got a reply with this in the signature:

***Due to Yahoo!'s complicity in the jailing of Chinese dissidents I WILL NOT ACCEPT EMAIL FROM YAHOO! ACCOUNTS*** For more information about Yahoo!'s work with the Chinese State Security Services, please
see: http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=14884

For those of you with control over your e-mail servers, this is an even better way to boycott Yahoo!'s services. I'm trying to get my current mail service to do this. I'm not sure if it can be done yet.

Furthermore, I'd like to note that Jesus' General's mention of this blog led to more hits than its appearance in the New York Times. Impressive!

[Edited: I forgot to link to the General! Sorry, sir!]

Daily Update

2006-01-23T08:02:00.000-08:00

The battle rages on between Google and the Justice Department.

Google has the dubious honor of owning and maintaining the largest database in the world--a database holding every search request ever made by its customers. Google is doing the right thing by fighting the feds, as this data (contrary to Yahoo!'s opinion) will reveal personal information. The reason Google has this info is to do their job more competitively. Should Google be forced to turn it over, they should destroy it instead. We'll see what happens.

In Other News

Jesus General has written an insightful letter to Yahoo! in his inimitable style. Mr. General, I salute you! Be sure to read the comments of the General's posting. There are some very humorous bits in there!

On Point

2006-01-22T07:57:00.000-08:00

While channel surfing on XM Radio, I chose my usual XM Public Radio. I heard about 5 words being spoken by a male with a French accent, talking about internet freedom. I knew right away that it had to be Julien Pain. I was right.

Good job Julien, with your appearance on "On Point" Friday night. You were on during traffic hours in Los Angeles, so you probably had lots of listeners here.

The show was asking the question, "Is the internet a tool promoting freedom, or is it just progressing the status quo?"

What an excellent question.

Search Requests Contain Personal Info

2006-01-20T10:32:00.000-08:00

As I suspected, an expert has come out and stated that the information requested by the US Government is a privacy issue.

In the article found here (you must go to page 2), "Pam Dixon, executive director for the World Privacy Forum, warned that the content of search requests sometimes contain information about the person making the query, such as names, medical profiles or Social Security information."

(From their website: "The World Privacy Forum is a nonprofit, non partisan organization focused on conducting in-depth research and consumer education in the intersecting areas of technology and privacy." They have offered up some excellent Search Engine Privacy Tips here.)

So on one side of this argument we have the US Justice Department and Yahoo! Yahoo! just turned over millions of their users' private information over to the US Justice Department, during a time when that organization is a "rigorous defender" of the White House's habit of performing illegal wire taps on US citizens. Yahoo! claims this is not a privacy issue, when they have a notorious disregard for their customer's privacy. Yahoo! is also struggling financially in the face of Google's growth. This side of the argument is relying on rhetoric, and hoping the listeners are not members of the "reality based community."

On the other side of the argument you have Google, who is dominating the market, and entering into a legal battle with a government agency that does not often get such a response. They are not relying on rhetoric; they are simply doing the right thing.

BooYahoo! is not outright endorsing Google yet, but I'm getting damn close ...

Google v. US Justice Department

2006-01-19T14:37:00.000-08:00

Google has just been sued by the Justice department because they refused to turn over information that the government wants to "monitor sexually explicit material on the web."

The Justice Department is making this move under the guise of the "Child Online Protection Act." Google did not comply because "providing the data [would] disclose personally identifiable information about its users.

"In response, the government said it would keep the data secret and that the request wasn't for personal information."

Google's response was to still not comply.

Yahoo! chimed in, with the following unintentionally hilarious quote. "We are rigorous defenders of our users' privacy," said Mary Osaka, a spokesperson for Yahoo!. "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."

Really Mary? Are you sure? If you were rigorously defending your users' privacy, you sure did roll over a lot faster to the Justice Department than did Google, who makes no such claims to being a "knight of privacy."

Google is starting to look like the actual knights of privacy here ...

2006-01-18T20:26:00.000-08:00

Julien Pain of "Reporters Without Borders" wearing the new BooYahoo! Tee Shirt.

Another Petition

2006-01-11T10:57:00.000-08:00

Julien Pain of "Reporters Without Borders" has asked me to help gain support of their petition regarding the recommendations, below. I'm happy to comply.

Please note! This petition is in French! Fear not, however, as this process is still very simple. First, read my post below to make sure you agree with the initiative, and would like to help support it. (More details are in the link below if you want them.)

If you would like to participate, go to http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=16119

In the field next to "Votre nom ou pseudo," type your name.
In the field next to "Votre adresse email," type your e-mail address.
Below that, in the field next to "Nom de votre site Web," type the name of your website, if you have one.
In the field next to "Adresse de votre site" (it has an http:// in it), type the URL of your website, if you have one.

Then you will get an e-mail (also in French), which is intended to validate your signature. Make sure you click on the www.rsf.org link at the bottom of the e-mail to verify.

Thanks for signing! This is a very exciting initiative. Everyone signature helps.

Reporters Without Borders Takes Action

2006-01-09T12:34:00.000-08:00

Reporters Without Borders has initiated action with the United States, asking them to take action that would ensure freedom of expression on the internet.

I’m very happy with how they are proposing we resolve the issue. They are using a two-phased approach. Initially, RWB is asking the US Government to urge Internet corporations (which all happen to be US-based companies), to reach an agreement among themselves on a more evolved code of conduct. Barring the success of this, they are recommending the “last resort,” which is for the US to draft the following into law: (The following is an abridged version of the information provided by RWB on their site.)

1. No US company would be allowed to host e-mail servers within a repressive country*. So, if the authorities of a repressive country want personal information about the user of a US company’s e-mail service, they would have to request it under a procedure supervised by US.

2. Search engines would not be allowed to incorporate automatic filters that censor “protected” words. The list of “protected” keywords such as “democracy” or “human rights” should be appended to the law or code of conduct.

3. US companies would not be allowed to locate their host servers within repressive countries. If the authorities of a repressive country desire the closure of a publication hosted by a US company, they would have to request it under a procedure supervised by the US judicial authorities. Like search engines, content hosts would not be allowed to incorporate automatic filters that censor “protected” key-words.

4. (Option a) US companies would no longer be permitted to sell Internet censorship software to repressive states.

4. (Option b) They would still be able to market this type of software but it will have to incorporate a list of “protected” keywords that are rendered technically impossible to censor.

5. US companies would have to obtain the express permission of the Department of Commerce in order to sell to a repressive country any technology or equipment which can be used to intercept electronic communications or which is specifically designed to assist the authorities in monitoring Internet users.

6. US companies would have to obtain the express permission of the Department of Commerce before providing any programme of training in Internet surveillance and censorship techniques in a repressive country.

* A list of countries that repress freedom of expression would be drawn up on the basis of documents provided by the US State Department and would be appended to the code of conduct or law that is adopted. This list would be regularly updated.

Note : The purpose of these recommendations is to protect freedom of expression. They in no way aim to restrict the necessary cooperation between governments in their efforts to combat terrorism, paedophilia and cyber-crime.

And MSN too?

2006-01-04T11:44:00.000-08:00

MSN is now enthusiastically playing ball with Chinese in censoring blogs. This story has just developed.

I will be rethinking about what action to take on this. Stay tuned.

2006-01-02T12:24:00.000-08:00

Oh No

2005-12-23T10:02:00.000-08:00

I've been called the "Stupidest Man on Earth" here.

Clearly this youngster is not in favor of boycotting Yahoo. Heheh.

2005-12-19T07:54:00.000-08:00

BooYahoo! Shirts

These shirts are not for sale. However, if you are one of the first ten people to e-mail me a picture of the word "BooYahoo!" being displayed in public, and you will get one of these shirts free. So mail you address as well.

Update

2005-12-09T12:01:00.000-08:00

OK, we have another T-Shirt supplier. This time I won't reveal who they are.

At this time, there will not be *any* way to get T-shirts unless you enter the contest. See a few posts down for details. T-shirts will all be mailed to you free-of-charge, and won't be sold publicly.

Imagine the prestige of wearing such a controversial and rare item ... ;)

This Just In ...

2005-12-08T19:59:00.000-08:00

"Boo" in Chinese, means "no."

We like this.

DENIED!

2005-12-08T15:16:00.000-08:00

The BooYahoo! Shop was not open for 20 minutes before we received an e-mail stating the images were being pulled for "copyright review." CafePress has over 2 million shops. They do not do this unless acted upon by an outside force. Clearly, Yahoo! is watching. The moment I posted the link on my blog, someone at Yahoo! called CafePress to have the image pulled. That is the only possible cause. I'm impressed (and, in an odd way, complimented) by Yahoo!'s speed of action.

No blame goes to CafePress. They are not in the litigation business.

So Yahoo!'s attitude toward censorship has not changed. Fine, I'll find another way to print the T-shirts-that-would-surely-topple-the-Yahoo!-empire ...

Sorry for the false alarm. Stay tuned.

BooYahoo!'s Guerrilla Marketing Program

2005-12-08T13:48:00.000-08:00

I'm happy to announce two things:

1. The BooYahoo! Shop is now open. [EDIT: It is now closed. Yahoo! intervened with CafePress. BooYahoo is now making the T-shirts themselves, but they will only be given away freely. Read on for more details.] The shop consists of Apparel, mugs, and bumper stickers with the BooYahoo! logo on them. Please note that we are selling these items at Cafe Press's costs, and are not getting any profit from them.

2. Regardless, you can win a free "BooYahoo!" t-shirt simply by participating in our guerrilla marketing program! Here's how it works:

a. You figure out a way to prominently display the word "BooYahoo!" somewhere in a public place that can be seen by lots and lots of people (the more the better.)

b. You cannot deface public property, or private property (unless it's your own), or permanently marr any living thing. (Please, no tree carvings. However spray-painting the word on your cow would work, as long it's a very, very popular cow.)

c. Other than that, be creative.

d. Submit your entry by e-mailing a photo (or a sound recording?) of your handiwork to Jim@Etchison.com. Tell the story of how it came to be, and let me know where you would like your prize mailed, which prize you would like, as well as your shirt size.

e. At the end of the contest the BooYahoo! staff (in other words, I) will send a T-shirt, baby-Doll shirt, sweatshirt, or a mug or bumper sticker if you prefer, to 10 carefully chosen winners. Winners will be chosen based on creativity, effectivity, and the number of eyeballs that see the word "BooYahoo!" The ultimate goal is for people to ask "What the heck does BooYahoo! mean?" Make them curious enough to look it up. Remember to attach some positive feeling to the word. For example, writing the word on a beautiful snowy hillside using your pee would probably attach a negative feeling to the word.

f. Have fun with it. ALL photos will be posted on this site unless they are grossly inappropriate.

Next Steps

2005-12-01T15:42:00.000-08:00

Apologies for not posting recently, but rest assured that I have not ended the effort. I've been watching the news for anything related, and the news has been relatively quiet. Also, I've been trying to garner some interest in creating a neutral 3rd party organization that would provide legal reviews for all identity requests. These inquiries are coming up dry, unfortunately.

Are there any Lawyers out there who specialize in International Law and need some pro bono work?

Stay tuned for a "BooYahoo!" T-shirt coming soon, and a few interesting ideas on how to market the boycott.

Thanks to Jim Hightower

2005-11-15T16:33:00.000-08:00

Last Thursday I got a curious spike in hits. Most of them seemed to be direct hits, so I figured someone on the radio or TV mentioned BooYahoo!.

Sure enough, I found the source to be Jim Hightower. Mr. Hightower is a radio host (among other things) from Texas, and calls himself a "progressive optimist in the age of Bush II."

I noted that Mr. Hightowers listeners didn't just visit this site. Many of them followed through and signed the petition. Mr. Hightower's listeners are people of action!

Thanks Jim Hightower!

Saying Boo to Flickr Too ...

2005-11-14T11:57:00.000-08:00

Flicker is one of Yahoo!'s most loved tools. But many people are extending their Boycotts to this as well, as evidenced by "Madjag's" recent addition.

I must admit it is strange to see the "BooYahoo" phrase popping up in so many places. Many thanks Madjag!

While I am not a user of Flickr or any image-hosting services. I did a quick search and found the following links to free image hosting services. I can't recommend them, but you Flickr users might want to check them out:

http://www.imageshack.us/
http://www.villagephotos.com/
http://www.imagecave.com/
http://www.free-webhosts.com/free-image-hosting.php

Let me know your feedback on these (or other) sites please! Thanks :)

Yahoo's Response

2005-11-10T08:04:00.000-08:00

Yahoo!'s response is below. It's from Rex in Customer Care. It further justifies our boycott.

Please note the very first sentence. It indicates that Yahoo believes that we netizens share no concern for abuses that don't occur in our own country. Either that or Rex did not comprehend my letter.

Note to Yahoo!: There is one internet. If it's poisoned in China, the entire organism is poisoned.

Another note to Yahoo!: By having no standards, your "terms of service" are as oppressive as any country wherein you operate. Your response is akin to the Nuremberg Defense. It didn't fly in Nuremberg, and it won't fly here.

Yahoo operates under the assumption that people do not care enough about this policy to make sacrifices. Even though a boycott on Yahoo! is a small sacrifice, it's the only way that Yahoo will believe that people do care.

For all you people who have boycotted Yahoo! so far, you can nurture your ire in knowing that your sacrifice did not make it past Rex.

Yet ....

Hello,

The issue in China that you refer to is specific to that country and will not affect customers who have registered with Yahoo! in other countries. Just like any other global company, Yahoo! must ensure that its local country sites operate within the laws and regulations of the country in which they are based.

By registering with or using the services of a local Yahoo! web site, a person has agreed to that local country site's respective Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which comply with the local laws of the country in which that web site is based. Yahoo! customers who are not registered with or use a Yahoo! China web site are not subject to CN data disclosure laws.

Links to the applicable Terms of Service and Privacy Policy can be found at the bottom of every Yahoo! website.

Regards,

Rex

Yahoo! Customer Care

Letter to Jerry Yang

2005-11-09T16:09:00.000-08:00

This was just sent to Jerry Yang, with the current list of petitioners attached:

Dear Mr. Yang,

The attached document is a list of people who have signed the petition against Yahoo! on www.booyahoo.com. Each of these people has agreed to discontinue use of Yahoo!'s services until Yahoo! adapts international privacy policies that allows for freedom of speech--wherever that speech may be occurring. The incarceration of Shi Tao served as a catalyst for this boycott.

These petitioners are not just armchair activists; they represent people who are so incensed by the outcome of Yahoo!'s policy that they have taken action to sever ties with your organization. Each one of them is doing their small part to spread the word about this boycott against Yahoo. Though this is a small beginning, their efforts are helping the website to gain momentum. It has already gotten noticed by Reporters Without Borders, Amnesty International, and the New York Times. Until the Boycott is lifted, this momentum will continue.

However, there is nothing I would like more than to lift the Boycott against Yahoo!. If you visit the website, you will see that I'm not a mere flame-thrower, but have taken a reasoned approach to finding a solution. Any of the following solutions would not only cause me to lift this boycott, but I believe they would also send a
signal to the industry, and place Yahoo! in the leading role once again:

1. Amend your privacy statement. Currently, it reads as follows:

• We believe it is necessary to share information in order to investigate, prevent, or take action regarding illegal activities, suspected fraud, situations involving potential threats to the physical safety of any person, violations of Yahoo!'s terms of use, or as otherwise required by law.

We believe that this policy is too simple for the complicated issues that face a multi-national Internet provider, and it would be better if stated as such:

• We believe it is necessary to share information in order to investigate, prevent, or take action regarding illegal activities, suspected fraud, situations involving potential threats to the physical safety of any person, violations of Yahoo!'s terms of use, or as otherwise required by law. Yahoo’s legal team will review each request to ensure compliance with international law, and to prevent human rights abuses.

2. Submit each request to a neutral third party who will review requests for compliance with International Law, and to prevent human rights abuses.

a. Such a group does not currently exist, but Yahoo! is in a unique position to request such a group to be formed. This might be accomplished through a special proceeding of the UN, or by non-profit group such as the International Commission of Jurists.

3. Work with other companies who are similarly involved in the world market (MSN, Google, Cisco, etc.) to set up a legal consortium that will review all legal requests to ensure compliance with International law and basic human rights.

Mr. Yang I realize that Yahoo! is morally neutral, and exists to provide profits to its shareholders. There is no shame in that. However, Yahoo! is unique in the world market in that its product is inextricably linked with the basic human right of free speech. While Yahoo! attempted to expand into foreign markets, you made your organization vulnerable to oppressive policies in those countries. While I would like to believe that Yahoo! has the best intentions to uphold human rights in those countries, you have given us no indication to that this is the case.

I am anxiously awaiting your reply.

Sincerely,

Jim Etchison
Jim@Etchison.com
Pomona, California

"... that which purifies us is trial, and trial is by what is
contrary" John Milton, Areopagetica, 1644
http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear/areopagitica.html

Update

2005-11-09T07:49:00.000-08:00

Reporters Without Borders adds coverage regarding their press conference from earlier this week.

The downloadable PDF shows a list of investment companies, and their statement of their commitment to invest in companies that uphold human rights. The implication is that they will not invest in "guilty" companies.

Now if I could only figure out a way to move my 401k over to this group ...

Corporate Reponsibility and Freedom of Expression

2005-11-03T11:10:00.000-08:00

Reporters Without Borders is holding a press conference in New York on November 7th. I was graciously invited to attend, but am unable.

Here is a snippet of what will be covered:

"Following Reporters Without Borders’ lead, 25 North American, European, and Australian investment funds and other organizations, who collectively represent over 21 billion dollars under management, have endorsed a joint statement in which they affirm their commitment to freedom of expression on the Internet, and in which they agree, among other things, to monitor business practices being implemented in repressive countries by Internet-sector companies."

The full article can be read here.

This is, in my opinion, a step toward an actual solution.

Solving the Problem

The collision of technology and culture has resulted in an unanticipated dilemma. Multi-national internet corporations are finding themselves faced with puzzling decisions that force them to choose between their primary goal of growing their business, and the goal expected of them by the free world: the preservation of the freedom of speech.

Recent events have transpired in China that show how these multi-national internet corporations are ill-equipped to play the role of legal arbitor and international diplomat. Hypothetically, Yahoo! may be given a court order from one country to reveal the identity of an internet user who is molesting children. On the same day Yahoo! might be given a court order from another country to reveal the identity of a poet who is disliked by a high-ranking official.

How is Yahoo! equipped to know the validity of one court-order, and the potential abuses that would arise from the other? They clearly are not. But by doing business with China, they have placed themselves in this precarious place. So has Google and MSN.

If this coalition of organizations were also willing to set up a group of qualified legal reviewers to go over these court orders, as a free and voluntary service to internet providers faced with similar circumstances, we might actually solve this issue.

I propose that all internet providers jointly agree to voluntarily submit court orders such as those used to divulge Shi Tao's identity to this neutral group. This body of voluntary specialists could review each case, and make a recommendation for the internet companies to follow. If such a procedure were put in place, Yahoo! could merely take the group's recommendations. This would do less damage to the relationship between Yahoo! and any host country, and also allow for the preservation of the basic human right of free speech without obstructing justice in potentially valid requests for identity.

Outside of this neutral 3rd party, Yahoo! is still responsible for making these decisions themselves, and they will likely opt for profits over human rights.

Daily Update

2005-10-31T13:13:00.000-08:00

I've found lots of sites where the word "Yahoo!" has been replaced with "BooYahoo!" Nice work! This was used to replace "Yahoo! Shopping" so it will definitely make an impact to Yahoo!'s bottom line. Feel free to link to here instead, but either way this was a great idea.

I'm sending off the first batch of petitions to Jerry Yang and Yahoo!. Thanks everyone who has signed so far. And thanks for the excellent messages to Yahoo!. If you haven't signed yet, please do so if you are able to boycott some or all of Yahoo!'s services.

Keep spreading the word!

Short and Sweet

2005-10-27T17:36:00.000-07:00

For those of you spreading the word about this site. You can now tell people to go to "Booyahoo.com." We now own the domain and it is redirected here.

A Compromise ...

2005-10-27T10:52:00.000-07:00

Some of my best friends have let me know how difficult it is to remove ALL usage of Yahoo! services for people who have used these services for their business. These are compassionate people who care, and they really want to help.

So, I'm suggesting a compromise:

If you have removed some of Yahoo's tentacles, and will not adapt any new Yahoo! services, and have the earnest intent to remove yourself from Yahoo! at some time in the future, then by all means sign the petition.

So even if you switch your IM engine, and use Marketwatch to monitor your stocks, and you are filled with ire at Yahoo! for tarnishing the internet, then please sign the petition. As long as you have eliminated SOME Yahoo! services, and refuse to use any new services, you will be impacting Yahoo!'s bottom line.

Thanks everyone!

Site Updates

2005-10-27T10:40:00.000-07:00

I've added some additions to the "Comparable Services" section thanks to a few great suggestions. Keep the suggestions coming!

I placed Shi Tau's picture on the sidebar. Does anyone have any of his poetry translated into English?

The number of petitioners is growing. Remember, this is all about the petition! Those who have signed are leaving great comments. Check them out.

Tip of the Hat to Mobuzz

2005-10-27T06:43:00.000-07:00

BooYahoo gets a rather unique plug here.

Shi Tao

2005-10-26T11:00:00.000-07:00

At last, a picture.

Liu Xiaobo's Open Letter to Jerry Yang

2005-10-26T10:59:00.000-07:00

The full text can be read here. Tom Zeller mentioned this article in his editorial, and I must say it is well worth the read.

It's important to know that Liu Xiaobo is a respected voice among advocates of Chinese human rights. He is a man who, after being imprisoned for 7 months without charges and harrassed numerous times by Chinese authorities, continues to openly criticize the Chinese government. He lives in Beijing. This man is the definition of courage.

Here's a quote: "I used to be a customer of your company. But after learning about the case of Shi Tao, I no longer use the two e-mail accounts I have with Yahoo!. I also will never use other Internet products provided by your company, and I will call on all netizens with a good conscience to reject your services until you break off your cooperation with the CCP's net police."

NY Times Article

2005-10-24T08:25:00.000-07:00

Tom Zeller Jr. wrote an editorial for today's NY Times that mentions BooYahoo!.

The entire text can be found here.

It's an excellent article. Thank you Tom!

Welcome to BooYahoo!

2005-09-28T13:16:00.000-07:00

Our aim is to get freedom-loving citizens of the internet to discontinue their use of Yahoo! services as a result of their oppressive policies, which resulted in the imprisonment of an innocent journalist in China.

While we are very interested in giving notice to China's human rights abuses, our focus is to preserve global freedom of speech on the internet.

If you decide to take part, please sign the petition.
You may also add the BooYahoo! button to your blog. (See the links on the right for more information.)

Let me know if you link to this site, and you will be linked in kind.

Thanks!

Comparable Services

2005-09-28T12:55:00.000-07:00

Yahoo! users who discontinue use of that corporation's products may need to replace any of the following services: (suggestions are welcome!)

- Free e-mail
- Instant Messaging
- Internet Search Engine
- Job Searching services (HotJobs is a Yahoo! affiliate.)
- Other Features

The following list provides some alternatives to these services:

Free E-mail

Please note that we are not necessarily recommending any of the following free e-mail providers. Use them at your own discretion.

www.hotmail.com (operated by MSN)
www.gmail.com (operated by Google)
www.firehousemail.com
www.easyscopes.com

Instant Messaging

MSN Instant Messenger
AOL Instant Messenger
Jabber (Jabber is a new open-source messaging service. Jabber is not a closed system. Plus, open source is cool!)
Googletalk

Internet Search Engines

www.google.com
www.MSN.com
www.altavista.com
www.lycos.com
www.dogpile.com

Job Searches

HotJobs is a Yahoo affiliate. Other job search engines can be found at the following links. Please note that we are not necessarily recommending any of the following services. Use them at your own discretion.

www.monster.com
www.dice.com
www.careerbuilder.com
www.snagajob.com
www.jobpier.com
www.job.com

Financial Reporting

For your stock monitoring, try this:

Marketwatch

Other Features

Yahoo! also provides music players, gaming sites, chatrooms, etc. As these services aren’t usually business-critical, we will leave it up to participants to find comparable services on their own.

Sign the Petition

2005-09-28T09:47:00.000-07:00

The following link will take you to the petition that accompanies our boycott.

Click here.

Pardon the ads, but it's a decent service and it's free.

On a regular basis, BooYahoo! will mail the petition results (and the link) to Yahoo!.

The BY Button

2005-09-27T16:56:00.000-07:00

This image can be uploaded to your blog's sidebar. Simply cut-and-paste the following code and add it to your blog template:

Why Boycott Yahoo?

2005-09-27T13:08:00.000-07:00

The three major Western internet providers in China (Google, MSN, and Yahoo!) have all been complicit with the Chinese government in helping censor the web searches of Chinese citizens. That alone is enough to boycott any of them. But Yahoo! has recently distinguished itself out as the most oppressive American Internet Corporation doing business in China.

Please see the link here for the full story from Reporters Without Borders.

The abbreviated version is as follows: An anonymous Chinese citizen sent out information about how the Chinese government intended to censor information about the 15-year anniversary of the massacre at Tiananmen Square. This person used a Yahoo! e-mail address to do it. The Chinese Secret Police asked Yahoo! to turn over the sender’s identity. Yahoo! claims they did not know the reason why the Chinese government was requesting, and complied with the Chinese Secret Police without argument. They identified Shi Tau, a reporter with The Contemporary Business News in Hunan, who is now serving 10 years in jail.

Jerry Yang, the multi-millionaire who sits at Yahoo!’s helm, told reporters that he had no choice in the matter. He alluded to the safety of his employees in China.

BooYahoo! believes that Yahoo!'s decisions are motivated by a single factor: profit. So it is clear that profits are the only way to provide them with feedback. Yahoo! chose to do business with the dragon, and now the Dragon's profits have apparently enslaved Yahoo!

Every human has certain inalienable rights that are not to be usurped by mere laws of mere governments. Anyone who says the law of the land is the bottom line is thinking like cattle. Yahoo!'s policy of abiding by the laws of whatever country wherein they do business is not a justification to dismantle freedom of speech.

Some people believe that a Western Internet company who is setting up shop in China should be willing to comply with human rights abuses there in order to create a glimmer of hope for the future of freedom and the availability of ideas. This is a dangerous and conveniently profitable deception. In the name of profits, Yahoo! is aiding Chinese oppression and eroding human rights globally. If the outermost tentacle of the internet's reach is poisoned, it must be amputated in order to protect the health of the entire organism. Yahoo! has become poisoned.

If the world of ideas were subject to genetics, freedom of speech would be a recessive gene, while corruption and greed would be dominant. Freedom of speech must be fought for in order to be retained.

It’s time for netizens to exercise their power. It’s time to call for Yahoo! to stop complying with any governmental laws when those laws conflict with basic human rights. By impacting Yahoo!'s profits, we hope to change this policy, and encourage like companies to follow suit.

If Yahoo amends their policy of abiding by oppressive laws, our efforts to boycott them will end.

What about Google and MSN?

2005-09-27T10:50:00.000-07:00

Google and MSN have both entered into a complicit agreement with China's oppressive policies. As of the writing of this blog, these two services--to my knowledge--have not yet provided personal information to the Chinese government that has resulted in the carrying out of any draconian measures such as those suffered by Shi Tau.

Therefore, it is the goal of BooYahoo! to focus our attention only on Yahoo! at this time. This may change any day, however.

Based on the policy of these two major internet services in China, Google and MSN may be guilty of the same Human Rights abuses that Yahoo! is currently guilty of. When faced with these decisions, however, Google or MSN may make different choices. People replacing the services may consider using services other than Google or MSN, in case they go the way of Yahoo!.

How to Close your Yahoo! Account

2005-09-27T09:08:00.000-07:00

Closing a Yahoo account is not simple. (The don't make it easy.) However, before you do, you should carefully consider what online memberships you have created using your Yahoo! account.

This blog's author had his Yahoo! account for 10 years, and had multiple online memberships. I found it very easy to change my e-mail address on every membership I had.

Also, you may want to consider your use of Yahoo! Instant Messenger. You can easily set up a free IM account using another service. Your Previous Yahoo! IM contacts can still contact you using a hybrid IM service.(See our Comparable Services Link.)

Once you're ready to cancel your Yahoo account, follow these steps:

1. Log into the Yahoo! account you are going to cancel.
2. Click the "mail" link.
3. Click on "My Account" on the upper left.
4. You'll have to re-enter your password.
3. Click on "Edit/Create Profiles" on the right.
4. Scroll down and click on "Read our help pages."
5. In the field at the right, type "How do I close my account?"
6. Scroll down and click the account deletion link.
7. Type in your password at the bottom and click "Yes."

You're done! Thank you for participating.