Slashdot Mirror
Facebook, Google Argue Against Web Censorship In India
An anonymous reader writes "Facebook and Google told the Delhi High Court today they cannot block offensive content that appears on their services. The two Internet giants are among 21 companies that have been asked to develop a mechanism to block objectionable material in India, and the Indian government has given the green light for their prosecution. Although India is democratic (in fact, it's the world's largest democracy), many fear the country will resort to censorship."
Should be made to shut up.
We here in the U.S. know that our politicians aren't in the least bit technologically savvy (yes, I'm painting with a broad brush when I say that). Should I be surprised or comforted to know that politicians in any number of countries are also, apparently, luddites? India doesn't seem to understand that what they're asking to do isn't technologically feasible. It would require a gigantic staff of people round-the-clock, judging each and every post and video before they're allowed to be seen by the general public. I understand that India doesn't have much of an issue with having enough workers when your population is one billion, but the cost to implement censorship on such a level? Astronomical. Seriously, if India is really that worried about "offensive" content, then maybe it's time for Google, Facebook, and whoever else they have an issue with, to just pull out and leave India to it's own devices. Or, maybe, the Indian government can get a grip and realize that their citizens aren't all little children needing a Big Brother to protect them from the entire world. The world is too small for nations to be so xenophobic, unless they want to wall themselves in like China and North Korea (and I'm sure there are other examples).
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
With population over 1 billion people, it makes me wonder what kind of democracy is actually applied in that country. Even winning an election 51 to 49 (supposed it works that way over there too), it would leave over 500 million dissatisfied...
Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
An analysis here suggests that the target of Internet censorship was against political blasphemy rather than any generic web censorship. Its worse than a state trying to censor the web as consistent with their national policies; in this case the 'ruling government' is molding laws as it sees fit to its political advantages. Only one of the so called complaints by the ministers was deemed a national security threat.
Why does anyone still believe that democracy means freedom?
I believe in freedom of speech. If some individual wants to stand up in public and say that he supports depriving every citizen of free speech and due process of law to help save the profitability of a 90 year old mouse cartoon - then I will defend his right to do that.
For an elected representative to not only do that - but to sponsor or support a bill which does that also - that's a different thing. That's a failure of citizenship, a neglect of your civic duty. These are essential liberties our nation was founded to protect. Such a representative should be removed from office as swiftly as the democratic process will allow, as he's a threat to the security of the Republic and the liberty of its People.
There is no Mulligan on this one, no middle ground. Either you are FOR freedom of speech and due process of law forever and always, or you're NOT.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
... the reason why the United States of America (may) remain the most powerful, prosperous country* in the world isn't because we aren't the best or most efficient or smartest.
It's because (it seems) invariably our competitors screw up in a big way. With China it's when their authoritarian government can't keep the lid on their repressed people, with India it's because their chaotic government can't promote effective policies. So let's hope that America's creatively destructive democracy hasn't wounded itself too much (thanks Bush) and will regain its balance. (Actually, hoping that the U.S. will outcompete China, a country 4x its population, is probably a bit much. How about a close second?).
As I've gotten (much) older, I'm wondering if I see a personal corrolary to this; I've seen people do well not because they've had spectacular successes but because they've managed to avoided catastrophic failures. Sort of like the tortoise and the hare I guess.
* prosperous BIG country; I know Switzerland, Singapore and Qatar are richer on a per capita basis but they don't have nukes. Or Facebook.
Reason that it is being discussed and is in court is good enough for not making it succeed. Courts in India have been much closer to western idea of individual freedom, so I hope that it would not get much further than govt. idea of getting cheap shot at conservative idea of censoring what it does not like.
The High Court has already given its go-ahead for the prosecution
Thats bad enough
It is a sensitive time in indian politics, the new generation (kids) of the current politicians are all set to make their splash into active politics. And if there is free press, then their family scams will start haunting them as well. so, in order to neutralize this, the current government wants to muzzle the free press and internet. Follow the fate of the public lokpal bill to understand what i mean. Of course, that is just my opinion, and i could be wrong.
It makes no sense to throw in the line about India being the "world's largest democracy".
All that that means is that India holds elections, and that it has a lot of people.
It doesn't mean that (as in other 3rd world democracies):
-India has a guarantee of freedom of speech like in the US
-India has constitutional protections for "life, liberty, and property"
-You can refuse to testify against yourself (an important protection against torture)
-The government doesn't censor (plenty of stories on RIM, etc., on Slashdot re: that)
The word you're looking for is "liberal democracy", i.e., a democracy in which an emphasis is placed on liberty.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
Since the court said that Google/FB/others must filter their content or be blocked, these sites should go along with the latter option and block all requests coming from India. It shouldn't take long for India to be clamouring to be let back in and offering that judge's head on a platter as a peace offering.
Its working out pretty well for them.
Today the many Chief Ministers (like Governors in US) and MPs (like senators in US) are from "untouchable" class which would not have been possible without "that democracy".
Just so that you know, "Untouchable" in India could vote before blacks could vote in Home of the free.
vinay rai is probably a paid puppet hired by this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapil_Sibal
he is a minister in the government and there was a huge public outcry when his attempts to force facebook into censoring stuff were leaked by the press. so this vinay rai is just another tactic to subdue the issue and get a court order so that facebook has no option but to comply.
Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
hardly get beaten or raped at all, much, compared to fifty years ago?
Yes, actually... Things are improving, though there's a long way to go. It's a flawed process, but the point is, it's happening
At least we didn't continue with the practice for a good 90 years after independence, fight a civil war over it and then spend the next 100 years not actually granting civil rights to those who were supposedly "freed" by the civil war...
Not above the magistrates' courts. The judiciary in India are not really appointed by the executive; they' have to be selected by a collegium of judges, and it usually goes by seniority at the next lowest level (I think they can co-opt eminent lawyers at the high-court level too). They can be quite bullish and independent. Which means that sometimes they do stupid things (present case, for example), but at least it's not from government influence
We were badly burned by Indira Gandhi's tenure, and since then, there hasn't been so much influence peddling in these matters. Some corruption, yes. But normally they're quite jealous in protecting their independence from the government.
Just as soon as we get a cast-iron definition of 'obscene' or even 'offensive' that applies to everything correctly for everyone.
It's okay, I'll wait...
Because, of course, language is never going to modify itself to route round censorship. No-one has ever invented entire new sub-tongues like polari, or thieves' cant to discuss dangerous or illegal subjects in plain sight without detection.
I wish these idiots nothing but the best with their endless game of Whac-a-Mole (TM).
Brazil's government/society isn't focused enough on the future (education)
As a Brazilian, unfortunately I need to agree with you. Our education system is improving, but too slowly for the problems and neglect we've had. On the other hand, many people who didn't valued education in the past has been valuing it now, due to the economic growth and the demand for more specialized and educated labor.