Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Twitter Social Networks

Twitter Sues India's Government Over Content Takedown Orders (techcrunch.com) 31

Twitter has sued the Indian government to challenge some of its takedown orders, TechCrunch reported Tuesday, further escalating the tension between the American social giant and New Delhi. From a report: In its lawsuit, filed Tuesday, Twitter alleges that New Delhi has abused its power by ordering it to remove several tweets from its platform. The lawsuit follows a rough year and a half for Twitter in India, a key overseas market for the firm, where it has been asked to take down hundreds of accounts and tweets, many of which critics argue were objected because they denounced the Indian government's policies and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Twitter Sues India's Government Over Content Takedown Orders

Comments Filter:
  • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @09:03AM (#62674600) Homepage Journal

    Write something negative about Modi on Slashdot, even something well-researched, and you will be modded down and comments will be left about how you are ignorant. Just try it, why should I have all the fun?

    These tactics only have to be used to hide malfeasance. Leaders who walk their talk don't need toadies to sanitize the internets for them.

    • by zlives ( 2009072 )

      why bother, dictator gonna dictate. Trump 2.0 would be the same in US, democracy an all

      • To say absolutely nothing about the Biden administration's demand that social media companies take down posts they deem "misinformation". If "Trump 2.0" would be a dictator for doing so, what does that make Biden?

        • You put misinformation in quotes⦠but it shouldnâ(TM)t be. The dissemination of verifiably false information that can hurt people needs to be curtailed. Weâ(TM)re not talking about political speech⦠weâ(TM)re talking about people saying that you should drink bleach to get rid of Covid.

          Donâ(TM)t try to equate these two things as the same: they are not.

  • So you file a lawsuit against a country which is run more and more like a dictatorship, and you decide to file this lawsuit in a court located in the very same country. What could possibly go wrong, apart from the authorities laughing out loud in your face?

  • Twitter needs to go see what they did to Tiktok in India.

    No wonder Twitter is always in financial straits, no business sense whatsoever.

  • by lsllll ( 830002 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @10:41AM (#62674872)

    I'm just having the time of my life watching Twitter's pains here. It's okay when Twitter decides to take accounts and tweets down, but not when the government of a country wants them do. The hypocrisy is staggering here.

    For the record, I'm against India's government asking for accounts to be disabled and tweets to be taken down, just as much as I'm for Twitter refraining from deleting tweets and disabling accounts.

    • Twitter is a private business. It should have the right to do business as it sees fit without government interference as long as it is not discriminating against a protected class (and, no, whiny right-wing fascists and NOT a protected class). The government has no right to police (most) speech.

      Why you people claim to be for the constitution when it comes to the second amendment and then be directly against the _first_ amendment will never fail to confuse me. Be consistent! Either the constitution is a

      • by lsllll ( 830002 )

        lol. Second amendment? You need to take your prejudice glasses off and stop assuming things about posters. You have no idea where I stand on the second amendment, let alone the first amendment which is even more complicated.

        Twitter is a private business. It should have the right to do business as it sees fit without government interference as long as it is not discriminating against a protected class (and, no, whiny right-wing fascists and NOT a protected class). The government has no right to police (most) speech.

        So you think the Indian government needs to abide by the constitution of the United States? Because, as you may know, Twitter is operating in India.

        • If you are truly not part of the conservative movement in the United States then I apologize. Lately, the group that has been complaining about censorship on Twitter has been that group - and they (as a group, if not every individual) have been very vocal about the second amendment as well. Even an individual that doesnâ(TM)t outwardly support the second amendment but still supports politicians that do is part of that as well. I find it hypocritical anytime Someone affiliated with that group argues

      • by lsllll ( 830002 )
        To address something else that comes up in Slashdot and very often (the effects of Citizens United decision, which was a travesty toward the people of the United States), let me ask you this question: when does a business become a "public" business? Because, as you wrote, "Twitter is a private business." Do you offer any distinctions between a huge, multi-billion dollar corporation whose stock is publicly traded, and a mom and pop S-Corp operating with 50 employees? I am completely behind the mom and pop
        • Sorry - didnâ(TM)t mean âoeprivateâ in the sense of a public ally traded / private. I meant in the sense of not being a public entity that is part of the government (like a public library, etc.). Same words - different usage.

      • The first amendment and no US statute has any notion of a protected class. You just invented that standard whole cloth. When youâ(TM)re using words like protected class in order to suppress speech about a class of people that should be critiqued, you are no different than the Indian government.

        • No - I didnâ(TM)t invent anything. Iâ(TM)m going by the current US law - which does recognize protected classes. See the civil rights act of 1964: https://www.findlaw.com/civilr... [findlaw.com]

          My statement was that Twitter can delete whatever it wants off of its private business servers - unless it is due to discriminatory practices based on race, religion, creed, etc. Note that âoepolitical affiliationâ is not listed as a protected class.

  • Recent case of a journalist. She was critical of the government. Posts were removed. People posted rape threats against her. These were not removed.

    • by lsllll ( 830002 )

      People posted rape threats against her. These were not removed.

      How does Twitter justify their actions? Isn't this against their policy?

news: gotcha

Working...