×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

India Sleepwalks Into a Surveillance Society

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the your-tech-support-calls-may-be-monitored dept.

Censorship 292

An anonymous reader writes "ZeroPaid has a fascinating roundup of news stories surrounding the latest surveillance laws passed in India, including a first-hand account of someone writing from inside India. The legislation in question is the Information Technology Act's amendment bill 2006, which was recently passed in the Indian parliament. Things you can't do with the new legislation include surfing for news in Bollywood and looking up porn on the internet. The legislation also allows all transmissions over the internet to be monitored for any form of lawbreaking and permits a sub-inspector to break into your house to make sure you aren't browsing porn on your computer."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

292 comments

Anonymous Coward (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309699)

The internet is really really great...

FOR PORN! (4, Funny)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309745)

I've got a fast connection, so I don't have to wait...

FOR PORN! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309827)

There's always some new site...

FOR PORN.

I browse all day and night.

FOR PORN.

It's like I'm surfing at the speed of liiiiight...

Re:FOR PORN! (4, Funny)

NoobixCube (1133473) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310021)

Normal people don't sit at home and watch porn on the internet!

Re:FOR PORN! (4, Funny)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310087)

Ooooooooooooooooooh? YOU have NO idea. Ready, normal people?

Ready!
Ready!
Ready!

LEMME HEAR IT!

THE INTERNET IS FOR PORN! (0)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310305)

THE INTERNET IS FOR PORN!

WHY YOU THINK THE NET WAS BORN?

PORN, PORN, PORN!

(unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop.unyell.filterstop>

No Porn? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309713)

AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA.

Wonder how long this'll last.

Shocking (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309715)

A government wanting to decrease people's access to information, bit by bit. What a surprising turn of events.
Seems that a good government ass-kicking is may be in order. Course, that seems to be the case in several places.

Re:Shocking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309915)

I believe we are currently in a time in the age of democracy where elected officials worldwide are figuring out that those who elected them are not willing to do anything about any of the laws that they pass or the actions that they take that ignore or strip their constituency of rights. They have grabbed their power and stand behind all other branches of government, serving the government instead of the people.

We are giving these elected officials extreme power. There should be extreme consequences when they abuse it. Infer from that what you will...

Re:Shocking (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310317)

I think in Germany "Staatsuntreue" (disloyalty to the state) is a major crime, on the level of murder. Except that I can't remember a single case where somebody actually got sued.

I also believe, that in many countries, you actually get shot when behaving in such a way. Either by law... or much more likely... by the revolutionizers, army or opposition, when the laws got ignored for too long.

I really hope the revolution comes quick and clean. Unfortunately, that's not how it usually works. More like bloody anarchy for a decade. :\

Re:Shocking (4, Informative)

gweihir (88907) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310763)

I think in Germany "Staatsuntreue" (disloyalty to the state) is a major crime, on the level of murder. Except that I can't remember a single case where somebody actually got sued.

You are completely clueless. First, there is no such crime in Germany. There is treason, but that exists in practically every country. And second, if it existed, you could not be sued, since it would be criminal law, i.e. you would be prodecuted.

Note: Get information first, then think, then shoot off mount.

Re:Shocking (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310931)

>I think in Germany "Staatsuntreue" (disloyalty to the state) is a major crime ...
>I also believe, that in many countries ...

Erm, maybe you should try some fact checking for a change. There is no such thing as 'Staatsuntreue' in German law and anything vaguely related (embezelment, misappropriation of funds, spying) is certainly not considered on the level of murder.

Re:Shocking (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310107)

How is this mod'd insightful/interesting? What's interesting is that many 'governments' are made up of people - like you and me. What's interesting is that as soon as you and me take on this civic duty, we somehow morph into some sub-lifeform who are automatically declared corrupt and tossed into the gutter by every half-wit with an internet connection.

Same with police officers etc. Hint: they may actually live and have a family right in your neighborhood -- they're not bred in some mill by the 'government' and 'grown' specifically to prevent you from doing whatever you feel like.

The statement above is no better than a hardcoded MOTD -- it does nothing constructive to address the matter at hand.

Re:Shocking (5, Informative)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310395)

Have you read about the Stanford Prison Experiment? Normal people like you and me can do atrocious things, if we feel justified. Police take a lot of training and talent to *not* act like thugs. Government officials don't have this sort of training.

Re:Shocking (2, Insightful)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310683)

That's because most people who get into a position of power got plenty of courting from the big lobby groups before getting the job.

Besides, some philosophies automatically declare any human as corrupt and it's no surprise that this becomes more of a problem as the human's power increases.

the cops ask for permit fees from the chap (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310911)

who sells those CDs.

Without a "permit" he cant sell CDs and the permit is a virtual bill of about 100-200 bucks a day.
Now which corrupt cop will want to stop earning a third of the month's salary for doing nothing?
To uphold a law passed in a North Indian office called Parliament where people are busy collecting other "permit fees"?
Gimme a break!

Porn sells like ... well, porn, and you can't get the cop to stop it - he loves the cash - and he watches the porn too.

That's the problem for parents, not the law.
Girls get pregnant at such "porn viewing sessions"(No, not from personal experience...).
And that's considered horrible in Indian culture - she might not get married EVER if its known to ANYONE. India is a different place. Premarital sex is the worst shame in India - and probably rightly so for our society. It's fraught with risks like STD infections, emotional turmoil, possibility of mental problems, addiction to drugs and God knows what else.
Parents know this and that's why this law - parents vote, after all.
Of course, flame me to death for talking against your sensibilities, but India has a different culture.

You know the old saying... (5, Funny)

Caboosian (1096069) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309725)

If they took all the porn off the internet, there would be only one website left: www.bringbacktheporn.com

Re:You know the old saying... (4, Informative)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310423)

Nope, it's already registered. And it's a porn site, so it would go too. I guess every domain name morphs into a porn site with an asymptotic probability of 1.0: non-porn sites can morph into porn sites (with a finite probability), but porn sites tend to stay porn forever. QED.

Re:You know the old saying... (1)

Raid3n (1358527) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310509)

Nope, it's already registered. And it's a porn site, so it would go too. I guess every domain name morphs into a porn site with an asymptotic probability of 1.0: non-porn sites can morph into porn sites (with a finite probability), but porn sites tend to stay porn forever. QED.

AKA Rule 34.

Will reading this in india will get you arrested? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309729)

Stud dogs go about the whole sex thing rather differently than primates (or equines). Unlike us, male canines don't have an orgasm that involves a short, intense ejaculation. Instead, once they have become fully erect, they will have a continuous orgasm for from 10 to 45 minutes or longer. The "standard" procedure for dogs, when they are mating, is that the male "ties" with the bitch - which means that, after he has penetrated fully, his penis will develop a knot at its base that is several times wider than the rest of his shaft.

For reference, a 80 pound Golden stud dog might have, let's say, a cock that is 7 or 8 inches long when erect - but his knot will be at least as big around as a tennis ball. This knot swells inside the bitch, and so long as he remains erect the dogs are "tied." No, this isn't painful for her - canine females long ago developed an entire set of muscular supports for this process. Generally, once they are tied, most stud dogs prefer to step off and over, so he and the bitch are tail-to-tail. Theories abound on why this evolved - I have yet to see one that was truly convincing. Anyway, they'll stand like this, with the male having a continuous orgasm during the whole tie - until he starts to shrink and they pop apart. Bitches also have orgasms, and she'll likely have quite a few during the tie, as well - research has shown that her orgasms are essential to increasing the chances of pregnancy, due to muscular contractions.

Anyway. if a guy like me has a stud dog partner, one form of intimacy is for him to tie with us, anally. As young teenagers, many of us learned the hard way about the knot, and the tie - particularly back in pre-interweb days. So we'd suddenly find ourselves locked together, with this tennis-ball width cock inside us. Nowadays, I suspect most young zoos know all about this. However, some folks still have eyes bigger than their stomach, err their you-know-what.

It would not be accurate to say that I have a stream of visitors who show up at my house just for sex with my canine partners. However, it is true that I do not exercise any sort of unilateral control/ownership over the relationships my canine boys might develop with other people - they are adults, and if they desire to get frisky with another two-legger and I judge that the person is respectful and unlikely to do anything mean or stupid, I have no moral ground on which to say "oh, no, you aren't allowed - he can only have sex with me." That just makes no sense, so if there's a time when a friend is visiting and there's a spark between them and one of my partners, I'm ok with that. In truth, I think it's great to have the boys' enjoy other positive relationships and I love to see them happy, whatever the circumstances.

Many years ago, a friend was visiting - a zoo who had been active with his own stud dog for quite a few years. His boy was a breed that is not small, but is also somewhat known by old-school zoos as being, well, on average not so well-endowed relative to their body size. This friend had tied with his partner on a number of occasions - and he often talked about how intense and rewarding the experience was, for both of them. That's great, I said - while thinking that he'd probably not fare so well with a larger breed.

As it turns out, he and one of my canine friends hit it off quite clearly right from the get-go - the chemistry was there and the two of them seemed like they'd known each other for ages. After several visits, I could see that they were sort of getting closer and closer - my friend was worried that I'd feel he was somehow intruding into my relationship with this handsome stud dog - who had been in my own family for close to a decade. Of course not, I told him - if you guys hit it off and things get steamy, I'd hardly throw cold water on it just so I can be all possessive and insecure. HOWEVER, I warned him, that handsome boy with whom you're making goo-goo eyes is much bigger than your own long-time partner.

I tried to be nice about this, but some zoos get their nose out of joint if you suggest their beloved might not be the most-endowed canine (or equine, or whatever) around. He was a bit like that - and right off the bat tried to convince me his boy was "really quite large for his body size," and who was I to argue? I did warn him that the stud dog he was considering, in my family, was somewhat over-endowed for his body size - and he was in the range of 120 pounds of low-bodyfat muscle. Beh, my friend said, no problem - I know what I'm doing. . .

Later that evening, after I'd gone to bed, I woke to the sound of toenails on the hardwood floor. There was also a bit of panting, a giggle here and there - not hard to figure out what was going on. Feeling a sense of impending doom, I made my presence known and sort of lurked in the background, sitting on the sofa and enjoying the huge, nearly-full moon casting shadows on the farm. The two boys were doing some sort of foreplay - it seemed cute to me, but I did (once again) warn my friend that this particular stud dog was also rather aggressive in his breeding - he'd sired many litters of wonderful pups, in his own career, and knew quite well how to get a proper tie with even inexperienced or skittish bitches. Yeah, yeah - my friend was clearly not thinking with the had between his shoulders, but the one between his legs.

In a flash, the big stud dog was mounted on my friend - and this time he wasn't just going through the motions, or playing. In just a few thrusts, he was inside - and with all that muscle, he held himself tight as he began to swell. It doesn't take long - maybe 20 seconds. I'm still watching, from the sofa, somewhere between shocked and bemused. For the first ten seconds or so, my friend is quiet and still as a winter night - not a sound save the deep grunting from my stud dog as he was swelling with each heartbeat.

Then, reality started to intrude (pun intended). My friend started to make this sort of whimpering sound - no words, just a low moan. Too late to turn back, I knew, so I held my tongue. Then, as my stud dog really began to take on his full size (which I knew from years of firsthand enjoyment was just under 10 inches in length with a knot just shy of softball size), my two-legged friend began to realize the error of his ways. This stud dog was, quite likely, at least double the width of his normal canine partner - and 3 or 4 inches longer. And, as reality is dawning on him, each heartbeat is causing the cock inside him to get bigger. . . and bigger. . . and bigger.

By now, he's positively crying - literally crying like a baby. No words, just sort of a quiet blubbering. He's smart enough to know there's no backing out now - and he didn't try anything stupid like pulling loose (which can, indeed, cause massive rectal tearing if done in haste - trust me, not fun). At this point my canine friend casually steps off from the usual "doggie style" position and, with years of practice, adjusts himself into the butt-to-butt position. And to add insult to (literal) injury, my canine friend has now plastered an absolutely massive grin on his face - when we say "shit-eating grin," this is it He's having the time of his life, tied with a new friend he's met, just starting into an orgasm that will go on for nearly 20 minutes. Not only does he not really know that his **** buddy is feeling like someone's put the better part of a baseball bat up his ass. . . I'm quite sure he doesn't care.

Just for good measure, I took a photo of the gigantic smile on the stud dog's face - nothing more than that, just his face and the grin to end all grins. Click.

My two-legged friend is now officially gibbering - it's really a verb, I didn't know that before just then. He's somehow begging for it to "stop, oh please stop" - but every now and then there's an "oh god oh GOD he's amazing" thrown in, before he's back to "oh PLEASE make it stop OOOH stop stop stop." This goes on, as is par for the course, for just shy of 20 minutes, at which point my stud dog friend begins to subside, pops free (with a characteristically loud and gushing dis-connection), and lies down to clean himself up and help his cock back into its sheath.

In contrast, my two-legged friend has simply fallen over, and curled up into a fetal ball. Well, I think to myself, I don't see any blood. . . oh, wait, I do see blood, but not really that much so it's probably ok. I get him a blanket and try to offer kindness without intruding on his pain, and to be honest without s******ing. The words "I told you so" are hovering out there, but need not be spoken at that somewhat awkward time. I do ask: "are you going to be ok, or should we head to hospital?" In between ragged breaths, he responds "no hospital, not going to die" - and indeed my own judgment is that he's far from dying, though he may feel like that would be preferable to the pain he's in.

I get him a blanket, and a pillow and get him comfortable right there on the hardwood floor of the kitchen. And our canine Casanova? Well he's cleaned up, wandered over to give a big, wet, shameless kiss to his worse-for-the-wear sexual partner and he's already asleep on the sofa, snoring - with grin still present on his face. Remorse? Regret? Not a chance!

The next day, I was impressed to see that my guest was up and at the kitchen table, with his well-endowed playmate from the previous night sharing a dish of eggs and toast, when I came downstairs with the rest of the canine crew. Impressed, that is, until I noticed he wasn't in any rush to get up from the table - ever. Turns out, he had indeed suffered some serious internal bruising - in a few days, the discoloration has spread from his lower back (which still makes me laugh, sorry, because I can visualize exactly how far in that cock had gone and, sure enough, that's where the bruise mellows out - a good bit of the way up his back and towards his ribs) down his legs, and clear to his ankles. Both legs. It's spectacular. He's walking like a rehabbed accident victim for several days, and for weeks afterwards he looks as if he'd ridden a horse for too long (again, laughing as I type). It was more than a month before he'd healed up more or less ok, and even then I'd see him wince if he bent down too quickly.

Is it wrong for me to think this is funny? If it is, so be it - it's ****ing funny. The transformation from swaggering "oh I can take that big boy, I know what I'm doing" to hunched-over victim of a mind-expanding lesson in what "big" means when applied to stud dogs - all in the blink of an eye. Yes, it's definitely funny.

Of course, in those early weeks, he promised me he would NEVER do something like that again - NEVER tie with a dog bigger than his own long-term partner. And, he asked me with genuine indignation, how could I keep tying with that dog who had torn him up so badly? Didn't I know the danger I was in? I responded, casually, that I appreciated his concerns but, to put perspective on things he should remember that his dog compared to that stud dog who tore him up so badly, in terms of relative size, the same way that the tearer-upper compared to my Dane partner at the time. His eyes grew wide - comprehension dawned. . . "you don't tie with that monster, do you?" I glanced over at my beloved Dane who, looking up at me, thumped his tail a few times in flagrant collusion with my own thoughts. "Who, me? Tie with that massive dog? Now what kind of crazy fool would do such a thing?"

Re:Will reading this in india will get you arreste (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309799)

tl;dr

Re:Will reading this in india will get you arreste (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309943)

Score 5: Disturbing.

=O

Re:Will reading this in india will get you arreste (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310817)

That was sexy :3

This is how terrorism works (5, Insightful)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309759)

Make the idiot masses panic with a spectacular, loud, but in all honestly tiny (a few psychopaths with boats and guns) action. Foolish laws are drawn up despite everyone "knowing" where they go. If there's any sign that the society is not going there, repeat to set it back on course to its own destruction if possible.

Re:This is how terrorism works (1, Troll)

dontmakemethink (1186169) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310033)

Worse yet, it is a re-assertion of religion over state. Do any terrorists not justify their acts in some way through religion?

Re:This is how terrorism works (5, Interesting)

the_womble (580291) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310503)

Most terrorists outside the Middle East are doing it for purely secular (usually wanting a seperate state or something simlilar) causes. Examples:

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam: the masters of suicide bombing. Want a separate state with a secular consitution.
IRA, INLA, UDF, UVF etc. Loosely affiliated with religious groups because the ethnic groups they represented followed different religions, but no religious content to their nationalist ideology.
Basque separatists: want a separate state.
FARC: Marxist Leninist
Abu Nidal Organization: Secular Palestinian
Shining Path: Maoist
Various spin offs of the Revolutionary Organization 17 November (Greek communists)
Various separatist groups in India: some may have a religious motive, most are nationalists.

Defenders of many of the above may say that they are not really terrorists (e.g. because their main activity is fighting against armed forces). however all have made some use of undoubted terrorist tactics (i.e. bombs targeted against civilians without the sanction of a state party)

Re:This is how terrorism works (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310903)

You forgot one:

CIA: Feudal Corporatocracy

Re:This is how terrorism works (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310909)

Yes, yes, yes... but could you explain how any of these groups have been using pictures of nude people to terrorize society?

Re:This is how terrorism works (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310621)

Make the idiot masses panic with a spectacular, loud, but in all honestly tiny (a few psychopaths with boats and guns) action. Foolish laws are drawn up despite everyone "knowing" where they go. If there's any sign that the society is not going there, repeat to set it back on course to its own destruction if possible.

If the masses won't panic about terrorism, maybe they'll panic about global warming. Everybody is going to panic about something, even if somebody's only fear is wearing a helmet full of rats. The only solution to all these problems is One World Government. The more the masses resist, the worse the problems will get. Eventually, people will panic and ask Big Brother to help them. "Please Big Brother, I want you to be in charge. Just please take this helmet full of rats off my head."

Terrorism, Global Warming, whatever the next big problem is. They are all just helmets full of rats. And everybody has to keep wearing the helmets until they admit that they want One World Government.

Soon they will put the capstone onto the pyramid. E Pluribus Unum. Annuit Coeptis. Novus Ordo Seclorum. One World Government.

Recordings is startings hears (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310825)

These guys are the most dangerous Indians posting on slashdot. Record their IPs - track them one by one and shoot them from the Sky using HAARP guns on satellites.
If you read this post, we pwned you, (deep throated nasal laughter)
Hawn! Hawn! Hawn!
Dieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!

Seriously speaking, we need people to actually think about social responsibility. I just hope the surveillance makes some of the nuts in the extremist-supporting communities (both sides are guilty) actually think of society and citizenship.
I for one, welcome this surveillance, not as safety against terror, but as a prod to civilised behaviour by educated Indians - which seems sorely missing. Our culture was wiped out by the British education system and now replaced by US satellite television. I hope surveillance at least sobers the alpha-males down to the point of "social animals".
Right now, they're *anti-social* animals (clarification: both communities).

Welcome to the club (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309761)

You can thank U$A for this. Just like all "terrorism"/"for the children".

Obama is a puppet of Bu$h and you know it. -1 flametrollbait for Change!

Re:Welcome to the club (4, Insightful)

KiwiRed (598427) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309773)

Considering it's India, I'd be more inclined to thank the lasting Victorian influence of the British Empire.

Re:Welcome to the club (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309833)

Right, of course the poor put upon indians aren't responsible for their own actions. You are not teh smart, eh?

Re:Welcome to the club (4, Insightful)

the_womble (580291) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310511)

Actually he has a point. Modern India (the same is true of Sri Lanka) has much more strict sexual mores than they once did. The change is undoubtedly due to British and Islamic influences: although nationalists will not thank you for pointing it out.

Re:Welcome to the club (2, Interesting)

Faylone (880739) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310635)

Considering this is the place that gave the world the Kama Sutra, yeah...things have certainly changed.

He's not Indian (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310987)

Obama is an Arab, not an Indian. You're confused because he's from Hawaii, which is next to India but actually considered part of the Middle East.

WTF? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309775)

India???

I live in Europe and I want my own TV show too... :C

Morality police (5, Insightful)

ardor (673957) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309829)

I can already see Indian sub-inspectors extorting people with records of porn they watched. Seriously, a morality police is among the worst things imaginable, it is like the crown of this totalitarian bill.

Re:Morality police (5, Interesting)

mellon (7048) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309877)

Actually, the evidence would suggest that the reason for the Mumbai attacks was not to establish a pretext for creating a panopticon state. Rather, it was a strategic move on the part of the Taliban in Pakistan to get Pakistani troops moved to the border with India and away from the Afghanistan border, so that the Taliban could act with impunity there. And that is precisely what has happened.

Next phase? Get rid of all the non-madrassa schools. Those are the ones that allow girls to attend. Then the entire region becomes a recruiting zone for more suicidal terrorists.

Meanwhile, back in India, this sounds like a typical piece of crap from the legislature, which often overreacts when bad things happen and writes legislation like this. Then there's a big public cry of outrage, and the legislation is withdrawn.

Anyway, India is the last place for a panopticon. Do you have any idea how many people there are there? It's simply not feasible.

Re:Morality police (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310357)

...and how many religions, traditions, ethnic groups/tribes/castes there are?

India is the farthest away from monolithic that you can get.

Not to mention the diversity of infrastructure (1)

Chmcginn (201645) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310703)

Anyway, India is the last place for a panopticon. Do you have any idea how many people there are there? It's simply not feasible.

From conversations some Indian nationals at work, school, and a few in-laws, there's a much greater diversity of infrastructure than most other countries in the world. Though the larger cities might be near the US in terms of infrastructure, in many of the rural areas, have reliable electrical power is more of a concern than having internet access, much less it being monitored by the state.

Reality is different. Re:Morality police (5, Informative)

freedom_india (780002) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309979)

Reality is much different here:
Like the stupid ideas of the British Parliamentarians who propose outlandish laws, these are also the same kind of crap.
The constitution contains a STRONG reference to freedom of speech and expression: Porn being one of them. So the upper house will either return it back or hold it.
Secondly, the police have lots of other things to do than look at each image and text as porn or not. The ratio is close to 1:1,6333 cops:people. Hence rest assured, this is one law that will not cross the door.
Thirdly, The Supreme Court is a HUGE people-friendly institution here that does not shy away from arresting and imprisoning even the biggest politician here. Hell, they get a kick out of doing it just for fun. This law will be challenged by an NGO and surely be banned outright, or struck down.
Lastly, the ruling party is a middle-path: Neither the right-wing BJP nor the extreme left-wing communists. Their priorities right now are the economy and Pakistan, so this law will be forgotten instantly even if passed.

Re:Morality police (2, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310341)

Especially since there is no relation between sex and morality. It's just so common to use that lie that the churches use to make their believers sinners forever, that everybody thinks there is.

[removed] (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309847)

This post has been deleted by the `Surveillance Task Force Under-ops'. (STFU.)

Rule Britannia (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309857)

Good to know the Raj isn't over. O_o

Also, WhopperVirgins.com has been banned, for EVERY POSSIBLE reason.

Re:Rule Britannia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309911)

Also, WhopperVirgins.com has been banned, for EVERY POSSIBLE reason.

Man: This your first Whopper baby?
Woman: Yeah, I'm a little scared...
Man: Don't be honey, they're great.
Woman: Ok hear I go *chomp*
Woman: OHHHHHH! Mmm! Mmmmmm! Ahhhhhhhh!
Man:...
Man: Damn, you crazy bitch, they're not that good.

Meh... (2, Insightful)

nitsnipe (1332543) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309873)

If there's one thing that you really can't control today is the flow of information.
Constructing an Orwellian society is impossible because geeks are always going to be many steps ahead.
Sadly though, the mentallity of many governments is still stuck in the past and most politicians have no clue what PGP is.

Re:Meh... (4, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309889)

I don't know. Depending on how strict the regime gets, I can easily see things being so risky that people simply don't want to mess with the geek-created tools, even if they exist.

If I'm risking an RIAA lawsuit for breaking some DRM, then who the eff cares. I'll take my chances. If the government is going to break down my door, drag me out and execute me if they catch me looking at porn, then I think I'd be inclined to just not download the stuff anymore, tempting as it might be.

You can't always rely on technical subversions to get you through this type of stuff. Fight it when it starts, when we still have a chance to beat it (and while fighting any government legislation is still legal).

Re:Meh... (1)

bm_luethke (253362) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310167)

"I don't know. Depending on how strict the regime gets, I can easily see things being so risky that people simply don't want to mess with the geek-created tools, even if they exist."

True, few in our "modern" world seem to truly understand this - there are more places in the world where the rule of law is "kill first, ask later". We can easily ban *anything* - your possession is immediate execution. History shows again and again that this works (along with nature pointing out the folly of man)

Sadly there is almost no shortage of those willing to enforce this. Each group always thinks it is justified in doing some draconian measure because the Other Side(TM) did it first (and is almost 100% not true to an outside observer).

Headline Fearmongering (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309887)

Hi, I've been in India for the past 2 decades, and let me tell you, the /. headline is nothing but fearmongering. The legislation in question might have those provisions, however, like in Russia and the erstwhile Sovet Union, Indian laws are actually never enforced to the letter. Most of this stuff will never happen. So Dear /., nothing to worry about. This is a country where law enforcement agencies are entangled in red tape & politics to the extent that they've been unable to stop a terror attack(Mumbai 26-11), inspite of intelligence from the US 2 MONTHS in advance. This will never actually happen. Shame on /. for the sensationalist headline. The sensationalism is getting worse by the day! Thank you for reading my post. You owe me a BJ.

Re:Headline Fearmongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309925)

Those are the worst kind of laws. They get thrown at you when someone wants you to be in trouble for something else. Maybe that doesn't happen in India... yet. At least bribery is rampant in India, so you can always get off the hook that way.

Re:Headline Fearmongering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310603)

TFA is inaccurate to start with.

I went through the act, and I can't find any mention of the fact that *viewing* porn is a crime, nor do I see mention of things like the cops barging into your house at will and all that.

I'd have said "blogger uses sensationalism to get page hits; news at 11" but the site doesn't seem to be selling anything, except perhaps their own newsletter (didn't click on the link; ghastly color scheme gave me a fscking headache!)

Thou shall not make up random interpretations (5, Informative)

desinc (788828) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309917)

FTFA:
"Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device, â" (a) any content that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or (b) any content which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will... shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and with fine."

>> This provision seems to be a way to enforce acts online which would otherwise be quite serious in person. You can't threaten to kill someone IRL, so don't do it on the internet either...

"Whoever publishes/ transmits/ causes to be published/ transmitted in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either prescription for a term which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees.

If the material is sexually explicit act or conduct then the punishment on first conviction is imprisonment which may extend to five years and a fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees. In the event of second or subsequent conviction imprisonment may extend to seven years and fine to ten lakh rupees."

>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but this one looks like it prevents people from UPLOADING porn, not from looking at it. I am not aware of the current state of censorship laws in India (I'm sure some slashdotter out there does know), but I would assume that this is in place because publishing physical copies of porn is already illegal in India. I am totally just guessing here.

ZeroPaid has always gotten a boner about sensationalist material though. I'd be quite surprised if this wasn't completely misinterpreted...

Re:Thou shall not make up random interpretations (2, Informative)

Calydor (739835) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310029)

"causes to be transmitted" is a nice blanket term a lawyer can use to argue that by sending the GET request to the server, you've broken the law.

Re:Thou shall not make up random interpretations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310583)

Sounds like they just lakh rupees to me.

Like this is going to work (1)

argiedot (1035754) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309919)

Seriously, loads of Indian laws are notoriously unenforceable. Besides, IIRC, viewing pornography isn't illegal, it's distributing it that is illegal.

Anyway, it's interesting how little the average Indian knows about surveillance, and even more interesting how little he cares. Take me, for instance, until Research In Motion said that they couldn't allow the Indian Government to read email and stuff from Blackberries, I did not know that the Government could do that with my messages or phone calls.

Even otherwise, I find it hard to care, because even if intelligence gathering is done, it'll probably get stuck in a file somewhere, with nothing done. Really, incompetence cuts both ways - helps the militants, helps us.

Ideally, of course, it would be hard to make legislation like this and there would be protests and discussions about why laws like this do nothing to actually prevent terrorism, and how our essential liberties are being threatened. But try pulling stuff like that in a country where 120,000 people have starved to death or committed suicide for lack of a harvest. The large majority of Indians have more immediate issues to worry about, and the few who care can bypass these stupid strictures easily.

In addition, it's always been easy to be 'hard on terrorism', it's actually much much harder to have the resolve to fight it properly. And Indian politicians have rarely had the resolve to do anything.

Re:Like this is going to work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309947)

Seriously, loads of Indian laws are notoriously unenforceable. Besides, IIRC, viewing pornography isn't illegal, it's distributing it that is illegal.

If no one distributes porn, how do you see it? Maybe it should read: Distributing porn for a profit, is illegal.

Re:Like this is going to work (1)

argiedot (1035754) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310179)

Yes, but think practically. For a domain registered in the USA with a server in Canada, how exactly does Indian law have jurisdiction? IANAL, so I may well be wrong. They're very bad at blocking websites. Besides, blocking the distribution of pornography is simply impossible. It's unenforceable.

It's time (5, Insightful)

nightfire-unique (253895) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309923)

When are we, as humans, going to learn that we don't have to cater to the whiny religious/moral nutcases out there?

Politicians: GROW A SPINE. When a whiny anti-sex/anti-drugs/anti-rock-and-roll nutcase writes you, complaining that their sensibilities are affected by the private actions of others, tell them to get bent.

Please, please, please. For the good of society and the world. Tell those miserable people that they can stick their pathetic little psychosis where the sun doesn't shine.

We rely on you. You are our leaders. Please act like it!

Re:It's time (2, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310323)

You do realize you are not the only person in the world, right? Maybe you are pro-sex, pro-drugs, pro-rock-and-roll, but well, let me explain to you how democracy works. Politicians follow the votes (this can be disregarded in cases where people don't care, in which case the politicians are free to do whatever they want.....that's where lobbyists get a lot of their power). If enough people want something, then the politician HAS to vote in favor of it, otherwise he will be voted out of office, and someone else will replace him. Sometimes laws are even put up to vote directly by the people.......this is what happened recently in California on proposition 8, where the majority of voters decided that gay marriage is not something they wanted (for the record, in case you care, I voted against prop 8, although I really don't care much either way). So gay marriage is illegal. Sucks if you're gay and want to get married, but well, you have an option, you can convince enough other people that gay marriage is a good idea and put it up for vote again.

We rely on you. You are our leaders. Please act like it!

Where did you get the idea that you can rely on politicians as leaders? You do realize that the whole point of democracy is that we CAN'T rely on our leaders? If politicians always had their subjects' best interests in mind, then a monarchy would be a significantly more efficient way to get things done. But they don't, and thus we have a democracy so we can kick them out if we don't like what they are doing.

The end result is that in our society, the most powerful way to get something done is to convince enough of your fellow citizens to vote a certain way. Once again, this is what happened in California when lots of people in favor of proposition 8 cared enough about it to go call their neighbors and reason with them why it was a good idea. The opponents of prop 8 didn't have the same ambition, which is why at the end of the day they lost. They didn't convince enough people that they were right. That is how power works in a democracy.

Re:It's time (4, Interesting)

FilterMapReduce (1296509) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310489)

If enough people want something, then the politician HAS to vote in favor of it, otherwise he will be voted out of office, and someone else will replace him.

I think the GP's point was that politicians tend to act based not on whether "enough" people want it, but on what a particular small group of people wants. The silent majority may be more permissive about the sex-and-drugs-on-the-Internet issue than you think. I don't know either; it's hard to find a real dialogue on these "objectionable speech" issues in this society.

this is what happened recently in California on proposition 8, where the majority of voters decided that gay marriage is not something they wanted (for the record, in case you care, I voted against prop 8, although I really don't care much either way). So gay marriage is illegal. Sucks if you're gay and want to get married, but well, you have an option, you can convince enough other people that gay marriage is a good idea and put it up for vote again.

Your example may be undermined by the underlying issues around voters being able to override constitutional principles by passing amendments with only a simple majority. (That is: The supreme court is supposed to be able to make decisions like "equal protection implies that gay marriage is legal" and have it stick even if it's unpopular. A majority vote by the people is not the last word in a constitutional republic; it's subject to checks and balances like everything else. That a 52% majority had the power to circumvent that by amending the constitution is troubling.)

Once again, this is what happened in California when lots of people in favor of proposition 8 cared enough about it to go call their neighbors and reason with them why it was a good idea. The opponents of prop 8 didn't have the same ambition, which is why at the end of the day they lost.

That's not true. The campaign for Prop 8 didn't owe its success to grassroots support; most of that work was paid for by out-of-state religious interest groups with deep pockets (who cared very strongly, for reasons I can't fathom, whether people neither from their church nor from their state could get married). The campaign against Prop 8 was quite ambitious, with many impassioned supporters whose lives were changed by its passing, which unfortunately wasn't enough.

Re:It's time (1)

vistic (556838) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310563)

Wow... and here I thought governments had a responsibility to do stuff like protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority... protect fundamental civil rights... stuff like that.

What do you think about banning anti-miscegenation laws? (Since you brought up marriage as an example.) The Supreme Court ruled on it in Loving v. Virginia. At the time, the percentage of people opposed to inter-racial marriage was higher than the percentage of people now who oppose same-sex marriage.

I guess none of us are safe or have any real protections... we just need to always make sure popular opinion is on our side. In your twisted view of how government works, I mean.

India: called a democracy, quacks like feudalism (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26309929)

India, despite honouring itself as the largest democracy in the world, is - on the ground, at least - an exemplar of the class system.

Your higher classes are the rich families who go to boarding schools then usually foreign universities. The "better" ones may train as doctors, lawyers, etc., but many dabble in politics, where they take advantage of the pretty much universal corruption (especially in poorer areas) and ease with which one can lie to a mostly uneducated set of voters. I have a few family friends in this class.. some have minor royal titles (good enough to get HM The Queen to visit their wedidngs etc.). For them, money by Indian standards is no object, and while they may be socially restricted by tradition - childhood arranged marriage, for example - there's nothing that can't be wrangled out of with $ appropriately channeled to make it look like everyone's still behaving. The unwanted wife becomes a minor tax to pay and ignore.

What's more interesting, however, is the gap between the small middle class and the often illiterate, uneducated, unhealthy, dirt-poor, often racially inferior (by Indian standards) remainder. If you were you, in India, as a regular middle class Joe, you would have servants. I can't emphasise the extent to which a man's attitude to his fellow man changes when he keeps a gaggle of servants:

(1) It is not customary to treat your servants as equals in your employ, but as entities who must look up to you and talk to you with deference. From the moment you become aware of your household as a child you are taught to see these humans who are in some way less human than you. Once you can do that with one subgroup of humans, you can do it for any.

(2) These aren't well paid, well-educated guys with a calling to household service. These are people who need a job and whose fallback on hard times is a dusty street. It is easy to bully a man who cannot talk back.

In the USA and Western Europe, the significant quibble is - contrary to the perception of the average (Slashdotting) progressive political activist, whose opinions align with only a minority - between working and middle classes. As the blue collar moves up to white, or unionises, he increases costs and competition for the existing white. But in India, there is such a deep, desperate blue collar pool that the whites are under no threat.

In India, the primary concern is - as in any feudal state - that of the higher classes for the power of the middle. Laws must be written for arbitrary application to any undesirables in this class, while preserving that squeaky clean image for the ignorant voting proletariat that keeps them on your side.

This is merely one such law.

Re:India: called a democracy, quacks like feudalis (4, Insightful)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310479)

"Once you can do that with one subgroup of humans, you can do it for any."

To a westener in India it stands out like dogs-balls but if you look again you will find all humans spend a lot of time behaving like this, wealth just makes the behaviour more potent. Once you see that, all of the random ass-headed cruelty of the world will suddenly make perfect sense [cracked.com]. Not saying it's right or wrong it's just the way our wetware bios works.

Re:India: called a democracy, quacks like feudalis (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310801)

I can sum your post up in one sentence:

India - A third world slum with a very thin veneer of modern society.

Yes, I've spent months in India, I talk from experience.

This is *not* related to terrorism (4, Informative)

iammani (1392285) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309931)

I live in India and I can assure you that, there are no think of the children or think of the terrorists laws in India (Except POTA for terrorism, which was repealed two years ago, and a bill which is under discussion right now).

From a glance at the bill, I believe they wanted to cover all immoral acts and also leave the interpretation wide open. This is partly because of incompetence and stupidity of the person who wrote the law and partly because the law will be passed without a discussion in the Lok Sabha (one of the two parliamentary chambers), where I am sure not a single person would even have a vague idea of what the bill is, and subsequently though the Rajya Sabha(thought it does have few bright and technically sound people)

As Heinlein's Razor" said, "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"

That said, in India, it is always how the laws are enforced that matters; there are a number of laws, which even lawyers, judges, police do not follow.

And I do hope these change soon.

Re:This is *not* related to terrorism (1)

the_womble (580291) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310527)

Lok Sabha (one of the two parliamentary chambers), where I am sure not a single person would even have a vague idea of what the bill is,

India is just like everywhere else!

Re:This is *not* related to terrorism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310851)

Lok Sabha (one of the two parliamentary chambers), where I am sure not a single person would even have a vague idea of what the bill is,

India is just like everywhere else!

Not really. India has much greater problems than those which involve computers.

There is no clean water or sewage treatment facilities thoughout most of the country. Most
infrastructure is either falling apart or does not exist. Minor fraud is endemic preventing capitalism from really working. Begging is a way of life to a significant amount of the population.

The last thing India should be worried about is electronic crime.

Re:This is *not* related to terrorism (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310639)

As Heinlein's Razor" said, "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"

That's Hanlon's Razor [wikipedia.org].

HTH. HAND.

Re:This is *not* related to terrorism (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310651)

That said, in India, it is always how the laws are enforced that matters; there are a number of laws, which even lawyers, judges, police do not follow.

Ohh, I can predict a sharp drop in enforcement soon after they start to try. Very high turn over rates for sub-inspectors. Bashing into Indian mens homes fifteen minutes after they get home from work is not a good idea. In ANY country that has Internet.

The Chief Inspector, "Sub-inspector I have your resignation here. What is wrong. Why do you feel you need to leave the Morality Enforcement Unit?". Sub-Inspector, "Please. I don't want to talk about it". The Chief Inspector, "Did you get hit with a money-shot AGAIN?. That's the 3rd time this week. You poor bastard. Good luck. Hate to see you leave. Apu! Front and center. Your on the front lines now son. Make us proud."

First they came... (3, Informative)

aceofspades1217 (1267996) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309977)

When first they came for the criminals I did not speak

      Then they began to take the Jews

      When they fetched the people who were members of trade unions

      I did not speak

      When they took the Bible students, rounded up the homosexuals

      Then they gathered up the immigrants and the gypsies

      I did not speak, I did not speak

      Eventually they came for me and there was no one left to speak

Hmm, seems vaguely familiar.

Re:First they came... (5, Informative)

aceofspades1217 (1267996) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309995)

Sorry wrong version


In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me â"
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came [wikipedia.org]...
by: Pastor Martin NiemÃller

I'm procrastinating quite a lot so ... (2, Interesting)

nitsnipe (1332543) | more than 5 years ago | (#26309983)

Apu's quick guide to cyber-anonymity:

Buy laptop with cash.
Buy a tiny 4gb+ usb thumbdrive with it.
Wipe hard-drive using any linux live-cd.
Make 2 or more partitions on the hard drive.
On the last partition setup Windows XP so that authorities have something to work with if they check your computer.
Setup your preferred linux distro on the first partition.
If option is offered encrypt your home directory.
If not use truecrypt and encrypt your entire linux partition. Leave Windows XP naked.

Setup GRUB so that:
-WinXP boots by default
-Grub doesn't show up at all unless desired combination is pressed upon bootup.

Label the linux partition as Recovery or Backup, be creative.
Do all your deemed illegal things on linux, and your "civilized" things on windows.
Use TrueCrypt hidden volumes for storing sensitive information, in case you are extorted.
Use HotspotShield VPN or Ultrasurf proxy for browsing the web.
If you can get a hold of a linux box in europe set-up openvpn with it.

Have a bootable livelinux on your thumbdrive just in case, along with portable truecrypt and stored hidden volumes if necessary.
Don't ever backup the same thing twice.
Use sneakernet or snailmail for sharing information with friends.
GnuPG is your best friend.

????

Profit!

Hizzah (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310017)

Now everyone can be in Bollywood

How'd that happen? (4, Funny)

davmoo (63521) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310049)

Damn...Obama hasn't even been sworn in yet and George W. Bush already has a job writing new laws in India...

It always been (4, Interesting)

Boolda (815642) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310077)

This reminds me of an incident where a TV show was taken off air because the show parodied Gandhi. It's sad that people of India have to depend on the abysmal incompetency of law-enforcing bodies to keep their privacy and freedom of speech alive.

Morality police - surprising? (1, Troll)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310257)

Not really. Guys, this is India, the country in which "sodomy" is still illegal and punished by several years in jail.

Re:Morality police - surprising? (4, Interesting)

iammani (1392285) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310411)

Yet another law enacted by the british. This one was written about 148 years ago.

Its just that no politician wants to risk legalising sodomy. It offers no returns in terms of votes, and is more of a risk.

Re:Morality police - surprising? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310679)

It happened already, It is legal. (UK)

"As a Labor Member of Parliament from Wales, (Leo) Abse introduced a bill in 1967 to abolish the sodomy law. He pressed the issue until the repeal of the law was passed."

http://www.365gay.com/news/082008-gay-sodomy-obit/ [365gay.com]

"sexual acts between two adult males, with no other people present, were made legal in England and Wales in 1967, in Scotland in 1980 and Northern Ireland in 1982... the July 1, 1997 decision in the case Sutherland v. United Kingdom resulted in the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000 which further reduced it to 16, and the "no other person present" clause was modified to "no minor persons present". Today, the universal age of consent is 16 in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Sexual Offences NI Order 2007 brought Northern Ireland into line with the rest of the United Kingdom in April 2008"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_law#United_Kingdom [wikipedia.org]

As for the US : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_law#United_States [wikipedia.org]

Re:Morality police - surprising? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310457)

Why can't they be as enlightened as the United States, where sodomy laws have been off the books for a good five years now?

(See Lawrence vs. Texas, 2003)

Re:Morality police - surprising? (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310485)

Why can't they be as enlightened as the United States, where sodomy laws have been off the books for a good five years now?

Well, it's like the good old days of Antiquity for us in Europe - barbarians to the East and barbarians to the West ;)

Why? (2, Insightful)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310281)

Things you can't do with the new legislation include...looking up porn on the internet.

What moral standard are they claiming compels them to make this restriction?
I don't get the impression that Hinduism is very strict regarding one's sexual conduct.

Re:Why? (4, Informative)

iammani (1392285) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310361)

I don't get the impression that Hinduism is very strict regarding one's sexual conduct.

Actually it is not Hinduism that restricts it. I have seen many hindu temple with erotic statues. It was the British, who considered these objectionable and made it taboo during their century old rule. This opinion unfortunately still continues.

Hindus gift to sex: (1)

Samschnooks (1415697) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310935)

Things you can't do with the new legislation include...looking up porn on the internet.

What moral standard are they claiming compels them to make this restriction? I don't get the impression that Hinduism is very strict regarding one's sexual conduct.

Karma Sutra! Yeah, Baby!

Part of summary is misleading, but still worrying! (2, Informative)

cyberjessy (444290) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310359)

Here is a copy of The Bill [prsindia.org].

I just read through it, it makes several strong references to child pornography, couldn't find anything on "regular" porn though.

But anyway, this worldwide erosion of rights and freedom impacts the rich and poor countries alike. Except that in a country like India, you would have fewer voices speaking out because of other issues which are more important (like Hunger for instance). Such laws become tools for any state to silence dissidents.

You could silence critics by jailing them for looking at Porn. wow.

Wow this pushes back the date of my visit to India (1)

SupremoMan (912191) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310383)

This really pushes back the date of my visit to India from never, to never +1!

Seriously folks, this is India you are talking about. It's easier to have a list of things you can do in India. I'm not trolling, I really feel this way.

Re:Wow this pushes back the date of my visit to In (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310553)

You are missing out. The second most wonderful trip of my life, 10 years ago, was to India (the first most wonderful was to Sri Lanka). It is an amazing place. I cherish the memories of ny visit there and only hope I can return one day. Granted, it's not everyone's cup of tea. As a budget to mid-range tourist you have to have a sense of adventure and a willingness to constantly deal with hassles while struggling across country in soaring temperatures on buses, trains, boats, minibuses, taxis, aircraft - all of which bring their own problems. But you learn various tricks, such as tipping a hotel room boy to go and buy your train ticket for you - they can do it early in the morning and it's easy for them. You may have to wait for hours in a queue.

Re:Wow this pushes back the date of my visit to In (1)

wdef (1050680) | more than 5 years ago | (#26310557)

Oh, and the Taj Mahal really is the most beautiful building on earth.

Re:Wow this pushes back the date of my visit to In (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310939)

Oh, and the Taj Mahal really is the most beautiful building on earth.

The Taj Mahal is in India, it's not Indian. It was built as a mausoleum by a Mughal Muslim for his wife.

India's involvement in the whole affair is to rip off foreigners for entrance fees many times higher than Indians pay and to steal your mobile phone at the entrance.

Re:Wow this pushes back the date of my visit to In (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310887)

This is a country where cows are commonly worshiped as gods. When I cow walks into a road in India all traffic stops until it has decided to walk away.

They have bigger problems than computer crime.

Wow the 9000th reason not to go to India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310461)

Famine, disease, abject poverty, bronze age superstition, the black plague, flies, flies, flies, terrorist attacks and now an internet porn ban. Just keeps getting better.

Thank the porn lobby! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310539)

This is a simple matter of the Indian government responding with regulations to protect you, the consumer. Adult web companies refuse to do business with customers located in India: call centers have too much access to credit card info, and chargebacks are the biggest headache for any porn company. India is number one on the CC processor blacklist for this reason.

If the porn lobby and the Indian government didn't regulate this, you'd be ringing a call center in India right now to dispute your purchase of the entire "Curry Cream Pie" series.

Why Pr0n? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310589)

Why are governments obsess with pr0n*?
What does pr0n* do to people?

* adult consensual films including home made movies :)

discrimination? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26310791)

Is it even possible to browse the internet without coming across some porn eventually? Soon all the elderly in India are going to be in jail because they use IE6 and have no idea how to remove pornwarez.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...