India Orders Google, Facebook, Yahoo To Remove Religiously Offensive Content

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - U.S. companies Facebook, Google and Yahoo, and other internet firms, have been ordered by two Indian courts to remove material considered religiously offensive, the latest skirmish in a growing battle over website content in the world's largest democracy.

One court in the capital Delhi on Friday issued summons to 19 companies to stand trial for offences relating to distributing obscene material to minors, after being shown images it said were offensive to Hindus, Muslims and Christians, the PTI news agency said.

"The accused in connivance with each other and other unknown persons are selling, publicly exhibiting and have put into circulation obscene, lascivious content, Metropolitan Magistrate Sudesh Kumar said on Friday in the PTI report.

India has generally unrestricted access to the Internet for those of its 1.2 billion people who can afford it and are on the electrical and telephone grids.

So far only about a tenth of the population uses the Web, but with the number of connections growing fast in the religiously conservative society, concerns about the nature of web content are growing in some quarters, including senior government officials.

Another Delhi court earlier this week told the websites to remove photographs, videos or text which might hurt religious sentiments.

"We believe that access to information is the foundation of a free society," a Google spokesman said in an emailed statement. "Where content is illegal or breaks our terms of service we will continue to remove it."

The spokesman told Reuters the company had not yet been officially notified of the courts' action.

The courts and the other companies were not immediately available for comment.

Earlier this month, Telecoms Minister Kapil Sibal urged Facebook, Twitter, Google and others to remove offensive material, unleashing a storm of criticism from internet users complaining of censorship.

The Delhi court cases were brought by individuals, one by a journalist and the other by an Islamic scholar who runs a website called fatwaonline.org that gives answers to moral questions.

Despite rules to remove offensive content, India's internet access is largely free when compared with tight controls in fellow Asian economic powerhouse China. But in line with many other governments around the world, India has become increasingly nervous about the power of social media.

India has 100 million internet users, the third-largest user base behind China and the United States which is forecast to grow to 300 million users in the next three years.

(Reporting By Frank Jack Daniel; Editing by Erica Billingham)

Related on HuffPost:

Comments

[MEVirginia]

04:46 PM on 01/04/2012

The site mentioned has been hacked.

[Epiphany2b]

11:11 AM on 12/27/2011

Seems to me if I'm an adherent to a particular religion with certain taboos, I would stay away from offensive content, and it would be up to me to make that decision. What business do they have even going to websites that might contain things that offend them? I find Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh offensive, but it seems ridiculous for me to demand they be removed from the airwaves because of it... I just don't go where they are. I suppose this is the difference between trusting people to make wise decisions, and determining that everyone is an idiot and has to be under strict government/religious control.

[Lonnie DeVorak]

06:54 PM on 12/26/2011

I feel the world should stop selling beef and pork and everyone should start eating veggies because we shouldn't disrespect the India's religions. Look India, if you don't want to read it, don't, if you don't want to eat it.....duuuuuuuhhhhhhhh DON'T, but don't think that you are the driving force in the world. Maybe you should think of making your own internet and you can control what everyone sees just like China. Crap, half the porn I get in my email is from India. GET REAL!

[NYnotLiberal]

02:35 PM on 12/26/2011

Another example of how Religion is all about controlling people. Apparently the religious leaders decided "we can't have the flock looking at stuff unfettered"......jeez, they might start questioning what we're telling them, and I got a good gig going here!"

[Almondo]

04:41 AM on 12/26/2011

Filtering does not work in China and it will never work in India. Tunnels and proxies are just the tip of the avalanche of mechanisms that will turn any filter plan into a comedic game of whack-a-mole.

[PenguinLinux]

10:45 AM on 12/26/2011

Exactly.

[Ambidextre]

02:43 AM on 12/26/2011

Most of the people commenting here are not in India and don't know much about the country first hand.
Secular, but with a large Hindu population, India is right next to Muslim Pakistan and they have fought a few wars. India has withstood internal religious/communal riots between Muslims and Hindus and Sikhs and Christians etc. Given this situation, it is actually pragmatic to not fuel the fires of hatred, regardless of who it comes from and who it's directed to. Carelessly distributing material that is offensive to one or more religions is likely to lead to violence and is akin to yelling fire in a theatre. Just like your free speech gets limited in the packed theatre, similarly, free speech can get limited in other cases if it has the potential to cause violence or harm.

Commenting on the matter without knowing these facts, is not a very wise stance.

[ADRealist]

04:23 AM on 12/26/2011

There are individuals who use Religion as a reason to be peaceful and loving, and there are individuals who choose to use religion to be violent and hateful.

It is not Google's fault which path that they take. Nor the world's responsibility to step lightly on their hysterical imaginary beliefs.

[Almondo]

04:34 AM on 12/26/2011

Heh, I know too much about how much content of various 'politically incorrect' type flows on the world's big fiber maze. This is theatrical comedy at best. If the zealots knew what everybody else was downloading they would go recursively ballistic.

[weirdamerica]

11:49 PM on 12/25/2011

If these so-called religious people had true faith in their beliefs they wouldn't need the 'doubt' taken off the web. But alas... deep inside they know their beliefs are vapor in the wind.

[catz1515]

03:30 PM on 12/25/2011

this tells me that religion is based on a falsehood and that gig is about up.

The only way to ensure religion survives is to ensure no one hears the truth. One only has to look at countries that ban any thoughts outside of state sponsored religion to see how religion is actually a facade to control people.

[Dieter Zerressen]

11:35 AM on 12/25/2011

Religion always wants government to help enforce their doctrines on their disciples as well as the rest of us. If religion were so wonderful and inspirational it wouldn't require blue laws to ride shotgun over it's participants. Along with laws, religion uses threats, fear, intimidation, social pressure and eternal damnation to control it subjects. Facts folks; this has nothing to do with how I feel about religion.

[Channa]

11:02 AM on 12/25/2011

Anyone want to bet this case is not being driven by the religious factions but by the local porn industry who don't like Internet competition? Or maybe they teamed up lol.

[Attilatheblond]

09:40 PM on 12/25/2011

An interesting possibility. But who is to say that religion isn't part of the porn industry? Nothing like creating a hunger to sell bad food.

[Marasbaras]

09:46 AM on 12/25/2011

There was a case here in the Philippines against Carlos Celdran where the Catholic Church charged him with hurting religious sensibilities. Cases like this one and the ones in India only help squelch voices who might speak against these religions.

Should these churches, as one commenter has suggested, provide irrefutable proof of the existence of a diving being (or beings), then they might have a legal leg to stand upon. But, as it stands, they are just proving that they're insecure in their positions.

A good religious leader would support freedom of speech and expression. And then say "while it is their right to produce such filth, a good person who not partake of it." Thereby trusting their followers to do the right thing.

[gavrielle]

03:10 PM on 12/25/2011

There are some people who just don't understand that removing temptation from society is not the same as resisting temptation. The first blames others for personal failure and is the modus operandi of the morally lazy, while the second is a sign of moral fortitude and self-discipline. Which do you think God appreciates more?

[Marasbaras]

03:23 PM on 12/25/2011

Well, those morally lazy people would say that all temptation be removed so that people cannot sin. This is due to the fact that their God apparently makes people so morally flawed that they will give into all temptation.

These same people want the government out of our lives ... that will make it easier for them to insert their own brand of morality instead.

When will people understand that morality cannot be legislated?

[Tsvi1]

07:40 AM on 12/25/2011

This makes more sense than censoring breastfeeding mothers.

[Almondo]

04:37 AM on 12/26/2011

I agree. The wingers on that kick have lost all of the tea in their bags.

[outofstepper]

04:28 AM on 12/25/2011

If you have a problem with the content, don't look at it. It is that simple.

[Parade Keegan]

09:49 PM on 12/24/2011

India needs to have internal censors if they don't like something!

[Parade Keegan]

09:48 PM on 12/24/2011

What's wrong with the "religion disillusioned", don't any of them have the brains to skip what they don't like. Wow, the "brainwashing" has turned them into puppets without their own self discipline! Insane!