US officials to Delhi court: Can’t summon Facebook, Google | Hacker News Reader

US officials to Delhi court: Can’t summon Facebook, Google

tech2.in.com

35 pointshelloamar39 comments

The most interesting part was this:

Even as Google and Facebook get a breather from appearing in court over allegedly hosting offensive content, the search giant has had to deal with another legal issue pertaining to the Google Mapathon event’s India leg. While Google has maintained that the Mapathon contest was in line with Indian laws, the company could see some court time in India over allegedly violating the cartographical laws of the land.

According to an interview with the Indian Surveyor General[1], Indian citizens can't map their own neighborhoods for security reasons. They must contact the government for permission.

Ah, famous Indian bureaucracy at work! All Google needed to do was ask permission and make a "donation", I'm sure.

[1] http://m.economictimes.com/opinion/interviews/googles-mapath...

Not sure bureaucracy's the reason for that; most probably it's the (not unrealistic) fear of a Chinese/Pakistani attack.

Likely. Who'd ever enact a law without a goal?

But it's wrong headed and pointless as well as being unjust.

An explanation for India's weird cartographic laws is in order. India has a ceasefire line with Pakistan as a border and significant claims held by the Pakistani's. Moreover with China it has an undefined border, where China is not even exchanging maps showing their claims.Published maps are taken as proof of 'facts on ground', during negotiations and arbitration. Combine this with a big bureaucracy and you have these laws. I wish we could not have these laws but given the present scenarios and an unfriendly giant neighbor, these laws are justified.

Are the laws applied in only the contested areas, or across the whole of India?

This article lacks a lot of context. I can't quite grasp what exactly is wrong. What communal hatred was committed, how are Google and Facebook involved in it? What was wrong with the maps?

Is there an article somewhere that gives some more background?

In many countries if you say something not nice it is a crime.

This OP-ed in 'The Hindu' gives you more context: http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-curious-case-of-vi...

Key quote: >>" Since August 2011, Mr. Kapil Sibal, Minister of Communications and Information Technology, has reportedly held meetings with the Indian heads of Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo and expressed concern regarding content on the sites hosted by these companies which maligned politicians and religious figures. The executives were reportedly shown content from their sites that could hurt religious sensibilities, as well as obscene images of Indian political leaders, and were told to screen user content and remove offensive material before it was uploaded."

There are a growing number of cases against Facebook and Google - the tax angle, blasphemous material hosted, minors creating accounts. To the cynic in me, all this just seems like Facebok and Google have not yet learnt to play with the the political big wigs.

To the cynic in me, all this just seems like Facebok and Google have not yet learnt to play with the the political big wigs.

To the cynic in me, all this just seems like Facebook and Google have learned just fine how to play with the political big wigs...as in how a cat plays with mice.

The balance of power between corporation <-> politician is different in India. Politicians usually, but not always, have more power.

"Spreading communal hatred" is the usual euphemism for anti-Muslim rants.

Just wait till they get an order banning Facebook and Google. See how Orkut previosly went inline with the Government.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2007-05-01/news...

And some more information... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_India

It only works the other way around. When will you learn that world?

I think it is only fair in this particular scenario. Indian laws for free speech are quite weak and their application largely political and opportunistic. While I would love the companies to be more responsible in all jurisdictions that they are involved in, I certainly hope that Govt. of India and Indian courts stop issuing frequently and often absurd take-down (and if I am not wrong, even arrest) orders for user generated content.

How is this at all different from the MegaUpload situation? Company, operating in a different country, not appearing to follow the local laws in the country that is using it's services, and the country wants to do something about it?

If I understand the Megaupload situation correctly, the crimes Megaupload and its executives were accused of were also illegal in the countries in which they were arrested. India's free speech laws are different from the US's though, so the same argument doesn't apply.

New Zealand also has a criminal copyright violation statute.

Which they might not have been violating.

And even if they were violating it, if New Zealand didn't want to pursue a case, why should America get the right to "World Police"?

Don't play daft. Mega was operating a business aimed squarely at the US market and built off the intellectual property of American companies. The US interest in seeing that case prosecuted is clear.

If NZ wants to alienate one of the world's largest markets, their largest military ally (and the guarantor of their security, particularly in their shipping lanes) to stick up for a foreign national running a criminal copyright conspiracy on their soil, they're free to do so. Don't get all huffy when they decide not to let that happen.

Do you really want every twobit country to be able to drag Americans to court?

No, he wants to blame the US for his country turning him over. If they get a free pass why wouldn't they turn him over?

If you don't want to hand over your citizens at the whims of other countries, why should you expect any other country to behave the same way?

Because I'm not a citizen of those countries. Because we don't have muppet courts. Because we have bigger guns. International relations aren't symmetric.

Strangely, I think it's only the guns that matter because you're not asking for anyone else's opinion on your courts.

That's not true. We regularly cooperate with the justice systems in peer countries.

You support the USA forcing extradition of foreigners, and you've said that extraordinary rendition isn't a crime, so really it's your turn.

I don't support this at all, but I'd let you be taken because you do. That'd end this sooner than your double standard.

Is not the fault of Americans if other countries are willing to do whatever they are told.

So if I take you into a small room and return with your wallet, its a defense that you, ultimately broken and bleeding, handed it to me to make the pain stop?

But the analogy is bad because in cases like this no force is used. Rather, they are willing to do the USA a favor because they are expecting some other type of favor. So still, the countries' fault for doing whatever the USA wants. If they negotiated bad terms is not the USA's fault.

No, no force was used right here, but the USA routinely uses force where it's politically handy, like chasing Osama into Iraq.

So it's more like me having extracted your friend's wallet and turning to you with bloody knuckles and asking politely for your wallet. No violence. To you. Because you're not going to say no.

Your example shows why context is important. You, of course, forgot to mention what OBL was responsible for and that he continued to incite violence after 9/11.

I think you meant Pakistan not Iraq or am I mistaken?

No, I mean Iraq. Bush lied about an Osama connection to justify a war with Saddam.

In an inter-personal context? No. In an inter-national context? Yes.

I don't understand why you think countries like India should be treated with the same standards as countries like the U.S. It's foolish to think you can have bilateral, equal relationships between countries who don't share basic values. There is much to criticize about the American justice system, but there is even more to criticize about India's justice system, and until they come up to our level we should treat them with a double standard.

In different contexts, I don't think such double standards would be controversial. For example, certain European countries refuse to extradite to the U.S. who might be sentenced to the death penalty, even though they expect the U.S. to extradite people to them who might be on trial for say fraud. I would argue that the double standard there is totally justified too.

"Up to our level" of holding prisoners, many not captured anywhere near a battlefield or with evidence of fighting the USA and leaving them in prison without trial. Of bombing whoever, whenever, wherever, without a trial, and without review.

Our level of persecution of whistleblowers? Or is that optional?

Oh, you mean basic values like the belief in perpetual copyright.

And your example isn't a double standard, the prisoner being accused of something that's a crime in both jurisdictions and the punishment not being unconscionable in the destination are the basic assumptions of extradition. The double standard is the USA playing political games with trade tariffs, etc to get someone who hasn't committed a local crime.

The conclusion I would draw is that the US government is not willing to hand over it's citizens to other countries, while other governments are.

In that perspective, I feel the wrong is on the other governments, not on the US.

Echoing canttestthis in the other reply subtread, the fundamental principle is that we won't hand over our citizens to other countries for things which are not crimes in our own: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_criminality

All of Europe refuses to extradite to the US if the death penalty is a possible outcome: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extradition#Bars_to_extradition and futher down it mentions "France, Germany, Russia, Austria, the People's Republic of China, the Republic of China (Taiwan) and Japan" flatly refuse to extradite, something that is certainly not true of the US.

I have lost all my trust in the Indian government. They have spent 400 Crore rupees on building a content monitoring system, which will monitor our online activities. 4 billion rupees could've helped many people who needed it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com