Wednesday, April 19, 2006
With reference to my previous post, a reader has kindly pointed out that Yahoo's general counsel, Michael Callahan, categorically denied in his testimony before Congress in February that the information on Shi Tao was supplied by Yahoo (HK), and stated that it was instead supplied by "Yahoo! China" (it is not clear exactly which Yahoo-associated Chinese entity he is referring to):
Let me take this opportunity to correct inaccurate reports that Yahoo! Hong Kong gave information to the Chinese government. This is absolutely untrue. Yahoo! Hong Kong was not involved in any disclosure of information about Mr. Shi to the Chinese government. In this case, the Chinese government ordered Yahoo! China to provide user information, and Yahoo! China complied with Chinese law. To be clear - Yahoo! China and Yahoo! Hong Kong have always operated independently of one another. There was not then, nor is there today, any exchange of user information between Yahoo! Hong Kong and Yahoo! China.
The source of these inaccurate reports is the text of the court judgment itself. This raises even more intriguing questions: if Mr. Callahan's testimony is accurate, it would seem to follow that the evidence cited in the court judgment is not, and that the court is either dissembling or using forged evidence. Curiouser and curiouser.