Kapil Sibal gets what he set out to censor

[Alchemist]

Congress ki jai Ho !!!

[ganeshran]

The government cant be serious about this. :facepalm:

[Laaloo]

[Desi Cartman]

:dd: winz :)

Lol :--D Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk

[Desi Cartman]

In the news I heard congress politicians talking about "online content hurting the religious sentiments of a community" and I was like its not compulsory to read everything or agree with everything posted online. I think they are going to use this in the upcoming elections in UP. Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk

[cowboysfan]

If people still vote for these morons they deserve it.

the other team has gone off the reservation.

[veer]

and on top of that.. they want big corporation like Wal-Mart come in to do business in India..

[Clarke]

In the news I heard congress politicians talking about "online content hurting the religious sentiments of a community" and I was like its not compulsory to read everything or agree with everything posted online. I think they are going to use this in the upcoming elections in UP. Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk

In the context of elections, it wouldn't matter. The percentage of population that has access to internet (forget being savvy) is less than ten percent. In states like UP, it will be much lesser than the national average.

[Pagalpanti]

page banned ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ He is gone insane .Comparing India (Democracy) with Communist countries like China ,Saudi Arabia and Iraq.:facepalm:

The "Indian Army Fans" page in FB (40' date='000+ members) has now be removed. First strike by Kangress.. #IdiotKapilSibbal[/quote'] Page is back and no it wasn't banned. Admin had hidden it from public view without notifying. :P

[Desi Cartman]

In the context of elections' date=' it wouldn't matter. The percentage of population that has access to internet (forget being savvy) is less than ten percent. In states like UP, it will be much lesser than the national average.[/quote'] You think the people who get out and protest for a joke/ picture of Mohammad actually see it on the computers first ? Local leaders use the opportunity to incite stupid people to carry out protests and destroy property. Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clarke]

You think the people who get out and protest for a joke/ picture of Mohammad actually see it on the computers first ? Local leaders use the opportunity to incite stupid people to carry out protests and destroy property.

That suggestion further enforces the fact that they'll protest whether its visible in India or not. Sure, it might be part of a Kangresi's speech, we've done this to protect your sentiments. It does not however translate into votes.

[punjabi_khota]

[punjabi_khota]

[punjabi_khota]

[Trichromatic]

India Puts Tight Leash on Internet Free Speech This is an old article and I posted this earlier in some other thread.

MUMBAI, India Free speech advocates and Internet users are protesting new Indian regulations restricting Web content that, among other things, can be considered ÅÅisparaging, ÅÉarassing, ÅÃlasphemous or ÅÉateful. The new rules, quietly issued by the countryÃÔ Department of Information Technology earlier this month and only now attracting attention, allow officials and private citizens to demand that Internet sites and service providers remove content they consider objectionable on the basis of a long list of criteria. Critics of the new rules say the restrictions could severely curtail debate and discussion on the Internet, whose use has been growing fast in India. The list of objectionable content is sweeping and includes anything that ÅÕhreatens the unity, integrity, defense, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign states or public order. The rules highlight the ambivalence with which Indian officials have long treated freedom of expression. The countryÃÔ constitution allows ÅÓeasonable restrictions on free speech but lawmakers have periodically stretched that definition to ban books, movies and other material about sensitive subjects like sex, politics and religion. An Indian state, for example, recently banned an American authorÃÔ new biography of the Indian freedom fighter Mohandas Gandhi that critics have argued disparages Mr. Gandhi by talking about his relationship with another man. Although fewer than 10 percent of Indians have access to the Internet, that number has been growing fast especially on mobile devices. There are more than 700 million cellphone accounts in India. The country has also established a thriving technology industry that writes software and creates Web services primarily for Western clients. Even before the new rules known as the Information Technology (Intermediaries guidelines) Rules, 2011 India has periodically tried to restrict speech on the Internet. In 2009, the government banned a popular and graphic online comic strip, Savita Bhabhi, about a housewife with an active sex life. Indian officials have also required social networking sites like Orkut to take down posts deemed offensive to ethnic and religious groups. Using a freedom of information law, the Center for Internet and Society, a Bangalore-based research and advocacy group, recently obtained and published a list of 11 Web sites banned by the Department of Information Technology. Other government agencies have probably blocked more sites, the group said. The new Internet rules go further than existing Indian laws and restrictions, said Sunil Abraham, the executive director for the Center for Internet and Society. The rules require Internet ÅÊntermediaries an all-encompassing group that includes sites like YouTube and Facebook and companies that host Web sites or provide Internet connections to respond to any demand to take down offensive content within 36 hours. The rules do not provide a way for content producers to defend their work or appeal a decision to take content down. ŵhese rules overly favor those who want to clamp down on freedom of expression, Mr. Abraham said. Ÿhenever there are limits of freedom of expression, in order for those limits to be considered constitutionally valid, those limits have to be clear and not be very vague. Many of these rules that seek to place limits are very, very vague.Ǽ/B] An official for the PeopleÃÔ Union for Civil Liberties, an advocacy group based in New Delhi, said on Wednesday that it was considering a legal challenge to the constitutionality of the new rules. Ÿhat are we, Saudi Arabia? said Pushkar Raj, the groupÃÔ general secretary. Ÿe donÃÕ expect this from India. This is something very serious.Ǽ/B] An official at the Department of Information Technology, Gulshan Rai, did not return calls and messages. The rules are based on a 2008 information technology law that IndiaÃÔ Parliament passed shortly after a three-day siege on Mumbai by Pakistan-based terrorists that killed more than 163 people. That law, among other things, granted authorities more expansive powers to monitor electronic communications for reasons of national security. It also granted privacy protections to consumers. While advocates for free speech and civil liberties have complained that the 2008 law goes too far in violating the rights of Indians, Internet firms have expressed support for it. The law removed liability from Internet intermediaries as long as they were not active participants in creating content that was later deemed to be offensive. Subho Ray, the president of the Internet and Mobile Association of India, which represents companies like Google and eBay, said the liability waiver was a big improvement over a previous law that had been used to hold intermediaries liable for hosting content created by others. In 2004, for instance, the police arrested eBayÃÔ top India executive because a user of the companyÃÔ Indian auction site had offered to sell a video clip of a teenage couple having sex. ŵhe new I.T. Act (2008) is, in fact, a large improvement on the old one, Mr. Ray said in an e-mail response to questions. Mr. Ray said his association had not taken a stand on the new regulations. An India-based spokeswoman for Google declined to comment on the new rules, saying the company needed more time to respond. Along with the new content regulations, the government also issued rules governing data security, Internet cafes and the electronic provision of government services.

[Aaku]

pre screeen it:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[King Tendulkar]

Although we have millions of cases pending in courts and many millions living below poverty line' date=' its amazing that the govt is worried about what fineleg has to say on a random website :hatsoff:[/quote'] :hysterical:

[King Tendulkar]

:hysterical::hysterical::hysterical:

[Clarke]

This is hence going to the Supreme Court ? I hope it does, Kangress gonna get one :poink: for stretching its governmental powers beyond reasonable limits.

[Sidhoni]

Sibbal :finger: