In a single sentence: The Internet is not outside the law. （网络不是法外之地）
Many comrades have mentioned economic or ideological aspects of the GFW, but ultimately everything has to be written in law.
Let’s start with a simple example of online content that would be banned even outside China, something that westerners will agree with: child pornography. In this case it’s very obvious that any platform (I will use this to refer to any website or app) that wants to operate legally will ban child pornography.
Next example that has mixed opinions: pirated music/movies/shows/games/books/etc. Some might be familiar with the USA’s DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) takedown notice that caused various pirate sites to close. Some legal Chinese platforms do host pirated movies/shows, probably because the copyright owners haven’t contacted them, but most of the time pirate platforms that look like Chinese platforms are actually based overseas because they are obviously against Chinese copyright laws.
Last example that I think is the most controversial: “free speech”, usually referring to political criticism and discussing “sensitive” incidents. While some terms are filtered/blocked online, this doesn’t mean that people can’t discuss them with substitute terms. The guidelines for what you can post varies from platform to platform, and also depends on the user qualifications.
Users have to be responsible for what they post, platforms have to be responsible for what they host, and regulators have to be responsible in ensuring that platforms are doing their job.
In this short regulation mentioned above from 1997, Article 5 basically outlines everything that is illegal online, there are many more laws and regulations since then but this is a pretty good summary: (English translation from DeepL)
第五条 任何单位和个人不得利用国际联网制作、复制、查阅和传播下列信息：
（一）煽动抗拒、破坏宪法和法律、行政法规实施的；
（二）煽动颠覆国家政权，推翻社会主义制度的；
（三）煽动分裂国家、破坏国家统一的；
（四）煽动民族仇恨、民族歧视，破坏民族团结的；
（五）捏造或者歪曲事实，散布谣言，扰乱社会秩序的；
（六）宣扬封建迷信、淫秽、色情、赌博、暴力、凶杀、恐怖，教唆犯罪的；
（七）公然侮辱他人或者捏造事实诽谤他人的；
（八）损害国家机关信誉的；
（九）其他违反宪法和法律、行政法规的。
Article 5 Any unit or individual shall not utilize the international network to produce, copy, access and disseminate the following information:
(1) incitement to resist or undermine the implementation of the Constitution and laws and administrative regulations;
(2) incitement to subvert state power and overthrow the socialist system;
(3) inciting to split the country and undermine national unity;
(4) inciting ethnic hatred or ethnic discrimination and undermining national unity;
(5) fabricating or distorting facts, spreading rumors and disturbing social order;
(7) openly insulting others or fabricating facts to slander others;
(8) Damaging the credibility of state organs;
(9) Other violations of the Constitution and laws and administrative regulations.
People have different opinions on what should or shouldn’t be allowed online, that’s fine. Currently most non-Chinese platforms are able to host a wider variety of content than Chinese platforms, they definitely have more “freedom” in this regard.
I should also mention that all platforms operating in mainland China are required to have an ICP record (ICP备案), regardless of whether the operator is a person or company, and companies have additional requirements like ICP license (ICP许可证). Now we have to look at how these laws and regulations regarding online content can be enforced.
In the case of local platforms operating within China, regulators can contact the relevant platform to takedown or censor any offending material, just like how normal users can report content for moderators to review, though regulators probably have special communication channels with platforms. Local platforms probably have internal guidelines for what is acceptable content based on their interactions with regulators, and will use them proactively to avoid attracting unnecessary attention from regulators, often to the detriment of user experience (like shadowbanning posts/comments that mention “sensitive” terms).
For foreign platforms operating outside China, I can only guess that the first step is to send an email requesting a takedown. If that fails then maybe the actual GFW will come into the picture. Though major western social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter/X, YouTube, etc.) are blocked by the GFW as expected, some news outlets like CNN, AP aren’t blocked, while others like NYT or WP are blocked. Lemmygrad.ml isn’t blocked but lemmy.ml, hexbear.net and prolewiki.org are. Google search and Duckduckgo are blocked but Yandex and VK aren’t. There is a lack of transparency in this regard as to which platforms are blocked for which reason. (Note that Microsoft’s Bing and other products are operating legally in China, with their ICP license and all that stuff.)
Personally these are some of the reasons why I think a foreign platform is not yet blocked by the GFW:
nobody reported the platform to regulators
the platform isn’t popular enough to attract attention
the platform isn’t popular enough among Chinese netizens
the platform does not contain illegal content
The GFW is a natural consequence of enforcing cyberspace legislation. The Internet is not outside the law. Though it may seem like the Internet exists somewhere in the clouds, the supporting infrastructure is real and concrete, and thus all platforms are subject to local laws and regulations. Most online platforms have their own methods of moderating content, their own Terms of Service (ToS), and their own share of DMCA-like takedown notices. Since foreign platforms do not have a legal obligation to Chinese takedown requests, the GFW becomes the only remaining option for cyberspace law enforcement.
As the Internet is the most powerful channel for manipulating the flow of information in this day and age, we should not allow capitalists to become the main legislators of the Internet. It is not a question of why any country should have a GFW, but who should be in control of it when it inevitably exists.
In a single sentence: The Internet is not outside the law. （网络不是法外之地）
Many comrades have mentioned economic or ideological aspects of the GFW, but ultimately everything has to be written in law.
Let’s start with a simple example of online content that would be banned even outside China, something that westerners will agree with: child pornography. In this case it’s very obvious that any platform (I will use this to refer to any website or app) that wants to operate legally will ban child pornography.
Next example that has mixed opinions: pirated music/movies/shows/games/books/etc. Some might be familiar with the USA’s DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) takedown notice that caused various pirate sites to close. Some legal Chinese platforms do host pirated movies/shows, probably because the copyright owners haven’t contacted them, but most of the time pirate platforms that look like Chinese platforms are actually based overseas because they are obviously against Chinese copyright laws.
Last example that I think is the most controversial: “free speech”, usually referring to political criticism and discussing “sensitive” incidents. While some terms are filtered/blocked online, this doesn’t mean that people can’t discuss them with substitute terms. The guidelines for what you can post varies from platform to platform, and also depends on the user qualifications.
Users have to be responsible for what they post, platforms have to be responsible for what they host, and regulators have to be responsible in ensuring that platforms are doing their job.
While I haven’t found any official Chinese government sources that directly mention the GFW, there are certainly laws and regulations regarding cyberspace, starting from “Measures on Ensuring Security of Internationally Connected Computer Information Networks” in 1997 (计算机信息网络国际联网安全保护管理办法, https://www.cac.gov.cn/2014-10/08/c_1112737294.htm). You can read more about the development of China’s cyberspace in the white paper “China’s Law-Based Cyberspace Governance in the New Era” here: http://english.scio.gov.cn/whitepapers/2023-03/16/content_85172148.htm, a summary of the legal process regarding cybersecurity is in section 2 of this white paper: http://english.scio.gov.cn/whitepapers/2023-03/16/content_85172148_4.htm.
In this short regulation mentioned above from 1997, Article 5 basically outlines everything that is illegal online, there are many more laws and regulations since then but this is a pretty good summary: (English translation from DeepL)
People have different opinions on what should or shouldn’t be allowed online, that’s fine. Currently most non-Chinese platforms are able to host a wider variety of content than Chinese platforms, they definitely have more “freedom” in this regard.
I should also mention that all platforms operating in mainland China are required to have an ICP record (ICP备案), regardless of whether the operator is a person or company, and companies have additional requirements like ICP license (ICP许可证). Now we have to look at how these laws and regulations regarding online content can be enforced.
In the case of local platforms operating within China, regulators can contact the relevant platform to takedown or censor any offending material, just like how normal users can report content for moderators to review, though regulators probably have special communication channels with platforms. Local platforms probably have internal guidelines for what is acceptable content based on their interactions with regulators, and will use them proactively to avoid attracting unnecessary attention from regulators, often to the detriment of user experience (like shadowbanning posts/comments that mention “sensitive” terms).
For foreign platforms operating outside China, I can only guess that the first step is to send an email requesting a takedown. If that fails then maybe the actual GFW will come into the picture. Though major western social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter/X, YouTube, etc.) are blocked by the GFW as expected, some news outlets like CNN, AP aren’t blocked, while others like NYT or WP are blocked. Lemmygrad.ml isn’t blocked but lemmy.ml, hexbear.net and prolewiki.org are. Google search and Duckduckgo are blocked but Yandex and VK aren’t. There is a lack of transparency in this regard as to which platforms are blocked for which reason. (Note that Microsoft’s Bing and other products are operating legally in China, with their ICP license and all that stuff.)
Personally these are some of the reasons why I think a foreign platform is not yet blocked by the GFW:
The GFW is a natural consequence of enforcing cyberspace legislation. The Internet is not outside the law. Though it may seem like the Internet exists somewhere in the clouds, the supporting infrastructure is real and concrete, and thus all platforms are subject to local laws and regulations. Most online platforms have their own methods of moderating content, their own Terms of Service (ToS), and their own share of DMCA-like takedown notices. Since foreign platforms do not have a legal obligation to Chinese takedown requests, the GFW becomes the only remaining option for cyberspace law enforcement.
As the Internet is the most powerful channel for manipulating the flow of information in this day and age, we should not allow capitalists to become the main legislators of the Internet. It is not a question of why any country should have a GFW, but who should be in control of it when it inevitably exists.
deleted by creator