Don’t expect Google and other tech giants to rush enforcement ban on ‘Glory of Hong Kong’ after court ruling, experts say

The US-based company previously refused the Hong Kong government’s repeated requests to amend its search results to rank the Chinese national anthem “March of the Volunteers” above the protest song

Jeff Paine, managing director of the Asia internet Coalition whose members include Spotify, Apple and X, said his organisation was assessing the implications of the injunction, including how it would be implemented.

“We believe that a free and open internet is fundamental to the city’s ambitions to become an international technology and innovation hub,” he said.

The three Court of Appeal judges concluded that the composer of the song had intended it to be used as a “weapon”.

“It has the effect of justifying and even romanticising and glorifying the unlawful and violent acts inflicted on Hong Kong in the past few years, arousing and rekindling strong emotions and the desire to violent confrontations,” the judgment read.

The injunction, which does not have a specified duration, bans the “broadcasting, performing, printing, publishing, selling, offering for sale, distributing, disseminating, displaying or reproducing” of the song with the intent of inciting secession or advocating the separation of Hong Kong from the rest of the country.

It also prohibits anyone from playing the song in a manner likely to cause it “to be mistaken as the national anthem” or suggest the city “is an independent state and has a national anthem of her own”.

Anyone found “wilfully assisting, causing, procuring, inciting, aiding, abetting others to commit or participate” in any of the stipulated acts would violate the court order.

Individuals could also be found guilty of contempt of court for helping or knowingly allowing others to participate in any of the stipulated acts. Academic and journalistic activities, however, are exempted from the order.

Secretary for Justice Paul Lam Ting-kwok singled out Google on Wednesday, saying there was no reason to doubt the tech giant would not comply with the order.

Lam said that according to Google’s policies, the company would respect local laws, remove relevant illegal content and ban misleading, deceiving or hateful remarks from spreading on the platform.

George Chen, co-chair of digital practice at the Asia Group who previously served as Meta’s former head of public policy for Greater China, said the chance of Meta proactively taking down content related to the song was low.

Content would be removed only after the company received requests from authorities, he said, adding Meta would expect a rise in compliance cost in light of the ban.

But it was highly unlikely companies such as Meta would leave Hong Kong as the city remained a key market for digital advertising business in the Asia-Pacific region, he added.

“If you feel your revenue is bigger than your risk, then you will stay even though the compliance cost is set to go higher,” he said.

Google could simply restrict how the song appeared on local search result listings and decline to enforce the ban globally, lawyer Joshua Chu Kiu-wah said.

Chu, who specialises in technology law, also expected Google to not take any action until authorities sent them requests based on the injunction.

Even if Google responded to the request, the tech giant might likely mitigate its risk by limiting the song from appearing on the search results only in Hong Kong and not responding to the ban globally, he said.

But the lawyer noted Google did not store the actual content of web pages directly on its pages.

“So there might be a bit of misunderstanding of how the internet works if one were to say that Google would remove certain content,” he added.

Steve Tsang, director of the SOAS China Institute at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies, said the ban had put US tech giants in “a very difficult position”.

“It is the expectation in the US that US media giants adhere to US values and not impose censorship on behalf of foreign states that do not uphold such a standard,” he said.

“These are US multinationals and they have to respond first and foremost to US legal and societal requirements, let alone the political ones.”

A government spokesman said on Thursday that relevant departments had been liaising with major internet services providers, social media platform providers and broadcasting licensees to draw their attention to the interim injunction granted, and were now waiting their response.

“Earlier on, a major internet service provider has made clear that it is willing to abide by the local law and respect court order,” he said. It was understood that authorities were referring to the earlier statement by Google.

Composed at the height of the months-long social unrest in 2019, the song gained traction among the city’s young protesters with lyrics such as “Liberate Hong Kong” and “revolution of our times”. The slogan was later deemed by authorities to carry a secessionist meaning in the city’s first national security trial in 2021.

It was played instead of the Chinese national anthem at several overseas sports events, prompting authorities to protest the mistake.

Public officials subsequently met with Google to ensure the Chinese national anthem appeared as a top search result for certain keywords, but those talks were unsuccessful.

Secession is an offence under the Beijing-imposed national security law, and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.