Comments on: Free to blog but accountable you are. The Supreme Court of India weighs in on blogging and online expression.

By: Durga Prasad

Durga Prasad — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:11:22 +0000

The Indian Politicians can speak, write , utter, and chat whatever, however, in whatsoever means they like. They are the original users of human rights and the violators of rights as well.

M.Durga Prasad
State Chief Secretary
All India Human Rights Association
West Bengal

By: ‘You Threat Anyone for Life on Orkut – You Face Criminal Prosecution’ – Supreme Court of India » Orkut Plus!

Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:36:44 +0000

[...] Write Web has covered this issue in detail. Dhananjay also shares his [...]

By: Simply Ridiculous

Simply Ridiculous — Wed, 06 May 2009 04:43:12 +0000

I have been getting a lot of hate-mail since I started blogging. Blogging on sensitive issues like politics and religion is always going to be tricky. However, the supreme court is absolutely wrong in this. The blogger is accountable for his views but not punishable.

By: create blogs

create blogs — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 08:58:26 +0000

This is pathetic, blogs are expression of self, its just an opinion, if the government wants to restrict it then its meaning less, Blogs are the there for the world to see ,its a way for the common man, aam admi to reach out, the politicians and the rest of the elite are scared that people have such a strong tool in their hands

By: PuneTech » PuneTech Comment Policy » Technology in Pune

PuneTech » PuneTech Comment Policy » Technology in Pune — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:50:42 +0000

[...] Free to blog but accountable you are. The Supreme Court of India weighs in on blogging and online ex… – Dhananjay Nene [...]

By: Global Voices Online » Shiv Sena’s Orkut Campaign: The Limits to Freedom of Expression in an Intolerant India

Sat, 28 Feb 2009 17:46:31 +0000

[...] Dhananjay Nene thinks that the Supreme Court's judgment isn't a conclusive blow to bloggers' rights – One important aspect which is perhaps easy to lose sight of in this debate is that the Supreme Court did not weigh in on the guilt or lack of it in this case, but on the fact that the person could not shy away from the responsibility to face the charges in a court. [...]

By: Shiv Sena’s Orkut Campaign: The Limits to Freedom of Expression in an Intolerant India | Gauravonomics Blog

Sat, 28 Feb 2009 08:01:40 +0000

[...] Dhananjay Nene thinks that the Supreme Court’s judgment isn’t a conclusive blow to bloggers’ rights – One important aspect which is perhaps easy to lose sight of in this debate is that the Supreme Court did not weigh in on the guilt or lack of it in this case, but on the fact that the person could not shy away from the responsibility to face the charges in a court. [...]

By: Dhananjay Nene

Dhananjay Nene — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 05:30:39 +0000

@Patrix,

Thanks for the link. Definitely more interesting and a far more erudite explanation from a legal perspective than what I was able to muster. Very valid issues, but before and after these are resolved (and they should be resolved), Criminal charges are always likely to be treated differently than Civil charges. The solution is perhaps by working out the right gatekeeper for criminal charges, not by diluting the the yardsticks by which criminal charges once formally made should get treated.

By: Patrix

Patrix — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:22:06 +0000

Also, you might want to check out this post that highlights how companies and organizations tend to seek refuge in this law to stifle criticism:

http://kafila.org/2009/02/25/bloggers-and-defamation/

It addresses your points about being a criminal case as well. The author is part of a collective of lawyers who engage with issues of law, legality and power.

By: Patrix

Patrix — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 20:19:45 +0000

Responded to your comment via email. But for sake of continuity, here is my response:

Validity of death threats can be debated. As long as the death threat is not credible as judged by the authorities and the plaintiff faces no imminent danger, it can be excused as impassioned utterances. But that’s besides the point. Hauling up a moderator who has little idea of who those anonymous commenters are makes little sense. Was Orkut requested details of the anonymous commenter’s IP address? The intent of the Sena was clearly to shut down the group and not react to a death threat. Sena activists have threatened worse for far less utterance (no justification though).

Anyway, re: personal preference of “responsible civility”, it is exactly that – personal. I don’t want yours or anyone else’s personal preference to impinge on my rights. Not that I do but if I choose to debate using certain words, all you can do is ignore me and not agree with my choice of words. Other people may be fine with certain choice words that you may find offensive. This preference for “responsible civility” can be extended to stand-up comedians as well. Are you going to restrict them from using the F-word?

Anyway, Indian Penal Code is extremely restrictive so I can’t say the law is on my side but I’m arguing for the spirit of the law and maturity of a society. Check out my blog for a post that I just made (linked to you as well)