What did he expect ?
Abhinav Bhatt, a law student based in Pune, filed a complaint with the magistrate’s court in June 2000, saying that Rediff has committed offence under section 292 of IPC (selling, distributing obscene material).
His contention was that if one was to type words such as “sexual intercourse” in the search window on rediff’s home-page, it threw up links of pornographic websites.
Maybe, he expected to find two birds tweeting, or two flowers coming together, like in the old Hindi films – but if you enter a search term like that – expect to get p*rn.
Maybe, Rediff should file a complaint that Mr.Bhatt was seeking p*rn – which is illegal in this country 🙂
“seeking p*rn – which is illegal in this country ”
Wow, that is news to me! Why is it illegal?
Using the law as a tool of social engineering is just plain wrong. The law must exist to protect us all and not to shove some imposed morality down our throats.
Whether this (trying to censor the internet) is hypocrisy or not I cannot say, but it is certainly immoral.
‘exploitation of women’ is one of the reasons given. ‘obscenity’ another.
I would rather people took care of their personal morality, and let the state take care of little things like roads, security and inflation 🙂
On a side note, it is super cool to have a #1 next to my comment (although its only a permalink!). Makes me feel like a school kid on results day again 😀
What’s using a * for porn? Are you trying to beat the spambots? They come in anyway. And * ruins the aesthetic appeal of text, which is this case, is an apt pun even.
Okay not so clever, but still apt.
don’t want more spam, than i otherwise get 🙂 phunny 🙂 ouch !
I guess he got that idea from Bing, which sets filters and censors its results specifically for India. Seeks publicity, that’s what DNA is giving him!
i once did a search for breast cancer on google and got a whole bunch of breasts 🙂 changed the filter on my search – it is as simple as that.
i am happy that the Rediff director is taking action, rather than rolling over and giving in.
Internet gives every bit of information you want or don’t want… What this guy want, “Firewall of China” to be implied in the India. And about DNA newspaper, Is anything left for
I’m with the law student in one sense- ‘sexual intercourse’ is not a p*onographic term, its a purely biological activity. So the said student might be doing an ‘innocent’ search for pure educational purpose, say to prepare for a forthcoming ….ok, medical entrance exam?
I don’t blame rediff either because p*orn is the only objective they know why readers search for the said term, so they throw him all the dirt that they had..
Confused…good that I’m not the judge who got to take a decision here..
Blame search engine optimization 🙂
By the way, what’s with the redundant phraseology? Moral hypocrisy? Is there one of another kind?[1]
[1] — Apart from the recursive.
is ther non sex porno possible? lol!