Clearly that it's my opinion that such behavior is unacceptable. There is no legally unacceptable behavior here. But private or not, why couldn't a company's behavior be regarded as unacceptable? There's plenty of things that, while legal, are not things people would be comfortable with a company actually doing. Plenty of people find Facebook's actions unacceptable. Are those not legitimate opinions, backed by reasoned arguments? Absolutely they are, even if there are reasoned opinions on the other side as well. What you seem to be saying is simply that you don't find unacceptable.
Also: This is a long term issue of national security, making the behavior of a company subject to a bit more scrutiny: US companies bolstering a foreign authoritarian regime by facilitating it's propaganda and censorship gives aid and comfort to a regime incompatible with our values.
Firstly, ATVI isn't a private company (not that it would necessarily make a difference here). But just a company can legally do something doesn't mean that they should.
why is it immoral to play by the rules of a country in order to access that country's population? the country's people should decide for themselves how they should be governed. or do you think you know better?
Again, you're continuing to insist that morality and legality are equivalent.
In some countries, beating your wife is completely legal. Certainly you wouldn't argue that it's moral.
Laws aren't written by average people, they're written by politicians who do immoral things and get away with it. They allow immorality for their own benefits.
Its a company, and should only do business. It should have no right to dictate other people's politics, platform, governance policy and speech. They have no right to stop what other persons speak because they are not the government.
Businesses should have no power except to sell their products and services (Not even indirect power that helps them sell their products and services better)
