Time to inject al little realism in the debate about he responsibilities of companies in regard to US foreign policy goals. The decision for Google to withdraw from China in fact was not difficult to make since it represented no more than 1.5% of it revenues. Had it been more like 12% and growing by leaps and bounds you can be sure they would have discovered a reason to stay. Business enterprises are not in business to help this country realize its foreign policy goals they are (surprise) in business to defeat their competitors and make money. As long as they do not violate American law that it precisely what they will continue to do. This is the business system we have chosen therefore we had better get used to some of the unwanted backwash. If we had a more mercantilist system such as France, Japan and of course China that coordinate commercial and foreign policy then we would really not have the free enterprise system that we have become accustomed.

... is the Anti-Christ.

if Google's policies are really so imbued with principle, they oughta get out of the US. now maybe i'm being a little severe, because I understand that Mr. Brin is supposedly reacting to the painful memories of a Jewish-Soviet upbringing. but i also don't like the NSA's unfettered power to hack everyone's email. Mr. Brin can take his principled stand, but the US government is in no such position to follow him. Has anybody actually looked into how potentially intrusive OUR govt's policies are, then compared them to the Chinese's? And let's remember, it was THAT type of behavior that our government condones (infiltrating email accts to isolate/investigate their political liabilities) that ticked Google off--not the selective censorship that our Secy of State is so keen on bashing. the chinese will never change a policy if we are going to be confrontational about it. "us" includes our companies. Obviously, these companies can make their own decisions, but the Chinese only change policies when it's an absolute necessity (this isn't) or when there are compelling domestic reasons for doing so. I was surprised yesterday--Tim Geithner knows his international politics better than his domestic politics. Okay...maybe that's not so surprising. But in this interview he deftly batted down a touchy question about the yuan on CNN. He impressed upon the Chinese people that their sovereignty is downgraded by an absolute reliance on the Fed's monetary policies. Think about that for a minute. He's encouraging people with a stake in China's domestic economy (e.g., Chinese companies supplying the domestic market) to shift their latent anti-Western outrage the Chinese government for its refusal to put money in the peoples' hands. He's encouraging the Chinese, rather than condemning them. He leaves that to other people in China. THIS is how you deal with the Chinese--not with condemnation and/or declarations of our own virtue. I agree with the criticism of China (in principle), and if this were a dispute with any other country I'd agree with your support for these companies and US govt. policy. But Chinese are a special case--they're too proud and too strong to be cowed by any attempts to embarrass them. I'm not saying a constructive stance is always good with Beijing--I think the Taiwan arms settlements were entirely necessary. But when POSSIBLE we should lower the temperature. The world's getting smaller, as we all know, and the bilateral relationship is so important now that it's beginning to resemble a marriage--it's almost literally a cohabitation of the planet. Just about else responds to us like a child. While they won't solve problems quickly, sensitive policies will be more conducive to Sino-American cooperation.

While I sympathize with you Tom, think about the business models. As internet companies, Google requires the trust of its users and a pretty open society in order to facilitate commerce. In contrast, Microsoft's main business is software. If Google or goDaddy can't make much money off of doing business in China because of its restrictions on free speech, its much cheaper to take a principled stance.

When your bread and butter doesn't necessarily rely on open communications, such as search and social networking, versus selling an operating system or office suite.

I hope Microsoft can push China, but I don't know if they can afford it.