Slashdot Mirror


Facebook Sued In US Court For Blocking Page In India

itwbennett writes: Facebook has been sued in California by the non-profit organization Sikhs For Justice for blocking their page in India. The group has charged Facebook with engaging in 'a pattern of civil rights violation and blatant discriminatory conduct' by blocking its content in the whole of India. It has asked the court for a permanent injunction on further blocking of the page, access to Facebook's correspondence with the Indian government about the block, and an award of damages, besides other relief.

4 of 100 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm .... by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rules framed in 2011 around Indiaâ(TM)s Information Technology Act allow the government to order intermediaries like network service providers to remove objectionable content, including material that is seen by officials as threatening the integrity, defense, security or sovereignty of the country.

    So, ignoring that the Indian government can be fairly arbitrary and capricious ... can you sue Facebook in a US court to demand that Facebook potentially goes against the law in India?

    Because I'm pretty sure a US court has no legal jurisdiction to say a damned thing about WTF Facebook does in India.

    Sorry, but once Blackberry helped get the access to communications, this precedent was set. And I'm fairly sure there's not a damned thing the US can do about it.

    I'm not saying the banning of the Sikh pages makes any sense. I just don't think there is any jurisdiction here.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Hmmm .... by bws111 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not even close to the same thing. Facebook is not rejecting people because they are Sikh, they are rejecting the content. Can a Sikh post on Facebook? Yes. If a non-Sikh posted the exact same thing would it get rejected? Yes.

      There is no muddiness at all. If you reject something because of some characteristic of the PERSON who said you MAY run afoul of anti-discrimination laws. If you reject something because of what the CONTENT is that is 100% freedom of expression.

  2. Re:Google+ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    G+ is awesome. No friends use it so I get to see interesting stuff and no stupid friends drama.
    I do agree get out of the house and hang out is the best social networking.

  3. Re:Google+ by Flytrap · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Even Google has to obey the law in India.

    If Google, Facebook or any other company doing business in India, Germany, Sudan, Britain or any other country for that matter, does not like the laws in that country, then they can take the moral high-ground, as Google did in China, and leave... even if it costs them dearly in future revenue growth.

    A victory in a US court for Sikhs For Justice will remain a hollow victory because it would be unenforceable outside the jurisdiction of that US court (unless Facebook is willing to be in contempt of an Indian court order - which will be fully enforceable in India). What Sikhs For Justice should be doing is applying pressure on Facebook to pull out of India in protest over Indian censorship... then a local social network site will take its place just as happened to Google in China.