Markets Nosedive

  • Most Popular
  • Most Shared

REUTERS SHOWCASE

RBI's May Review

RBI's May Review

Subbarao overrules panel view on rate action in May.  Full Article 

SBI Earnings

SBI Earnings

State Bank of India Q4 profit falls, shares drop.  Full Article | Related Story 

Bernanke Impact

Bernanke Impact

U.S. Fed enters delicate new phase of communication  Full Article | Column 

Subsidy Compensation

Subsidy Compensation

Government to pay state-run fuel retailers $8.1 billion in Q4 oil subsidy.  Full Article 

Ranbaxy Accusation

Ranbaxy Accusation

Daiichi Sankyo accusation "false and baseless": Singhs  Full Article 

Tata Steel Results

Tata Steel Results

Tata Steel reports loss on Europe weakness.  Full Article 

FDA Woes

FDA Woes

Wockhardt says FDA alert affects potential sales of $100 million.  Full Article 

Goldman Safeguards

Goldman Safeguards

Battle-scarred Goldman CEO unveils safeguards to avoid mistakes  Full Article 

Buy, Sell or Hold?

Buy, Sell or Hold?

Confused while buying stocks? Get buy, sell or hold recommendations from VantageTrade.  Full Coverage 

Reuters India Mobile

Reuters India Mobile

Get the latest news on the go. Visit Reuters India on your mobile device.  Full Coverage 

Google, Facebook oppose Web control in Delhi HC

Stocks

   
Track BSE Sectoral Indices

Track Markets: BSE Sectoral Indices

Track and analyse performance of all BSE sectoral indices and other global indices on a single page.   Full Coverage 

1 of 4. A Google search page is seen through the spectacles of a computer user in Leicester, central England July 20, 2007.

Credit: Reuters/Darren Staples/Files

NEW DELHI | Mon Jan 16, 2012 11:28pm IST

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Internet giants Google and Facebook told the Delhi High Court on Monday that it is not possible for companies to block offensive content that appears on their websites, in a case that has stoked fears about censorship in the world's largest democracy.

Google and Facebook are among 21 companies that have been asked to develop a mechanism to block objectionable material, after a private petitioner took the websites to court over images deemed offensive to Hindus, Muslims and Christians.

At the heart of the dispute is a law passed last year in the country that makes companies responsible for user content posted on their websites, requiring them to take it down within 36 hours in case of a complaint.

The case was originally filed in a lower court, but the companies have appealed to the Delhi High Court, challenging the lower court's ruling asking them to take down some content.

"The search engine only takes you till the website. What happens after that is beyond a search engine's control," Neeraj Kishan Kaul, a lawyer for Google's Indian unit, told a packed High Court hearing on Monday.

"If you use blocks, which is very easy for people to say, you will inadvertently block other things as well. For example: the word 'sex'. Even a government document like a voter ID list or a passport has the word 'sex'," he added.

Siddharth Luthra, a lawyer for Facebook told the court it was not possible for the social network to "single out" any individual on the basis of religion or views and said the users should be held responsible for content they post.

Less than a tenth of India's 1.2 billion population have access to Internet although its 100-odd million users make it the third biggest Internet market after China and the United States. Internet users in India are seen nearly tripling to 300 million over the next three years.

Despite the new rules to block offensive content, India's Internet access is still largely free unlike the tight controls in neighbouring China.

Civil rights groups have opposed the new laws. But politicians say that posting offensive images in the socially conservative country with a history of violence between religious groups presents a danger to the public as Internet use grows.

The high court will resume hearing the case on Thursday, Justice Suresh Kait said. The judge was last week quoted by local media warning the websites of China-style controls if they did not create a means to curb material seen as offensive.

(Writing by Devidutta Tripathy; Editing by Matthias Williams)

Comments (0)
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.