Why Sibal idiot's stupid policy sucks is mainly because of the following aspects
No accountability : There are no hard and fast rules describing what is objectionable . Any asshole can sue you if he doesnt like what you do. If you say for eg the Brown samosas you eat at singhie's corner totally kicks your ass , you may get sued because someone find the word brown racist and thinks that the ideal samosa color should be samosan yellow . calling something brown that is actually brown in color will hurt the sentiments of millions of Indian who are trying to turn whiter and whiter every year.
The courts will not give you any notification to remove the content or go through any legal process to uphold your rights. Given the right amount of money , anybody blogging about the shitty quality of broadband will be sued for disturbing the harmony of the thieves in suits sitting in those companies and for causing them stress and mental agony.
Sue not just the creator , but wire that carried that letter , the router that carried the packets to the website , the software that runs on the website and the processor manufacturer too ..
The Indian government has long adopted a powerful technique to attack a huge number of people at once . Blind fire . Sue the crap out of anybody . Right from the blogger to James Clerk Maxwell and Alexander Bell whose inventions lets us communicate with the world .Dont worry about logic . we will get someone atleast , even if is the lineman at BSNL .
Unlike some countries that enforce a sensible policy of being concerned only with the source of the creation, the Indian law explicitly mentions that the entire platform including the site and its owner and the ISP will be held accountable for the actions of the user. If this were to be implemented in the Indian govt structure than not only will there be any public servant in the next 3 months , we would save jmillions just bynot getting the Afternoon Chai and samosas for the Mahans.
The worst among this is the apathy towards this by the students and youth of our country. Egyptian college students took to streets . The ones in Libya battled against the regular army .Students in UCB protested , bunked classes to come out and voice against corporate mismanagement and tyranny .Yet you and I sit here , in front of our computer with a 5GB unlimited broadband , reading this while sideloading porn videos of Sunny Leone on the side . We deserve this for our lack of interest in the progress of our nation and the preservation of our basic rights .Probably the only thing you are going to worry about is missing out watching Katrina's ass in her next item song if her song is censored . We Indians dont give a rat's ass until it hurts us personally . The cowardliest race of the world deserves this and rightly so .
Freedom is not free! We must understand that a completely free country is not possible. Everything has its limits. Freedom of speech also clearly states that it must not hurt another person, religion or belief. There cannot be another completely free world (internet) where everything is okay.
ReplyDeleteNah.... you are absolutely wrong . People are capable or regulating themselves . The internet has been so since 1971 . We dont need no stinkin corrupt politicians to tell us what to do and what not to . Freedom of speech gives you the ability to voice any feelings you might have , for or against anything. If you start restricting free speech , this will be the beginning of end of freedom of all forms . While words may incite violence , the right solution isnt to stop it . Its like not using fire just because it might hurt you . So stop people who spread ill words and terrorism and messages of inequality instead of carpet bombing the entire civilization . I think history has enough lessons regarding this subject .
ReplyDeletePeople are 'capable' of regulating themselves, but they don't. Well, not always. People are also capable of behaving but still we need a constitution and a whole system to protect our rights and freedom. And I accept we will lose our freedom if we lose freedom of speech but everything has its restrictions. Sibal just meant 'censorship' and not complete ban. Complete ban is not simply possible according to article 19 of the universal declaration of human rights. There must be some regulation for 'filtering' the content and not just blindly banning the whole thing.
DeleteSreiada ... . I am exactly talking about the regulation of filtering . There are no basis in the existing law as to what makes up obscene and harmful content . A court recently passed a law to remove all anti-religious content from facebook and google. What does that mean ?? Hindus cannot think of killing cows in Muslim festival . Does that make it anti-religious. Muslim do not believe in deity worship and in their religion ours seem heretical . Does that make it anti-religious . Does criticizing politician constitute defamation ???
ReplyDeleteTalk about regulation when you can answer the above questions under law
One can talk about their own religion but they can't talk about other's. that is when it ll be labelled as hate speech. Hindus can 'say' killing cows is bad etc etc but they can't accuse muslims and persuade them not to do so! that is where the line comes. that is where the limit is!
Deleteouch. angry much?
ReplyDelete