Maybe I'm misinformed about this, but doesn't Google censor 'as needed' in countries, specifically China, for information that country's government does not want made public? (Info about tiananmen square massacre, etc.)

It seems obvious to me, that if the above occurs, its all for profit, not freedom.

I use google all the time, but this appears inconsistent.

Well, no it isn't, companies absolutely have to abide by local law wherever they operate, Microsoft doesn't think so, it's nice that Google does, even if the result is they're abiding attitude is assisting a corrupt government.

Don't forget, our own US government does the same damned thing to "extremely sensitive material or sites."

Sure, I agree with your point there. I don't have a ton of faith in our government, but I would still take ours over China's.

It is my impression that they claim no problems with limited exchange of info in China because it brings profit, not because they care about the law.

Here, I think they are claiming that limiting exchange of info(not government sanctioned obviously)is bad because it would cost them profit first (Either by getting sued or paying more money to have people take off copyrighted material, viacom's complaint), and second the transfer of information. That is inconsistent to me.

I don't care, both companies can handle it I'm sure. Passions of free speech, freedom, etc, aside, I just don't see google's motivation as anything other than business.

I wish I would have thought of google's adsense.

Have a good one, truly.

I have to go, I have to google something.

Maybe Google does respect local law more than Microsoft.... but personally I find Google to be a far FAR scarier of a company. They've been collecting an unbelievable amount of data over the past 5-10 years, with no intentions of ever letting go of it.

Sumgi,

You must be terrified of libraries.