Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 506 posts

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#91

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

lolinder wrote: post #17

On January 18 2012, Wikipedia went black to draw attention to SOPA [0], a bill they described as one that "could fatally damage the free and open Internet". Since then, we've seen a slow and steady march in the direction we all dreaded. Country after country has decided that they have the right to block content on the "free and open Internet", and business after business (even those who joined the SOPA protests) has…

>>> Were we naive even at the time? Have governments become more authoritarian? Or has our energy for resistance just been slowly whittled away?

Yes, naive to think that we could live in a world without fences. The internet makes it very cheap to tear down fences. Yet, good fences make for good neighbors. It was always naive to think that governments would let a torn-fences world, remain untouched.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#92

Post by utkarsh858 »

The article has not been blocked by Indian government but by Indian judiciary system with a trial, there's a difference. Also trials in India take a lot of time and conclusions are reached after much thought.

Also Wikipedia does not have a good track record of its editors free from misleading articles for defamation and propaganda. I won't trust at all the article in Wikipedia about the war between Wikipedia and ANI. The article (archive) already seems to present the court in a bad flavour.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#94

Post by Rury »

lolinder wrote: post #17

On January 18 2012, Wikipedia went black to draw attention to SOPA [0], a bill they described as one that "could fatally damage the free and open Internet". Since then, we've seen a slow and steady march in the direction we all dreaded. Country after country has decided that they have the right to block content on the "free and open Internet", and business after business (even those who joined the SOPA protests) has…

It's just politics... Replace "open internet" with "land" and imagine countries (ie people) are attempting to block others access to some resource. It was naive to assume that the internet wouldn't adhere the nature of our reality.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#95

Post by EasyMark »

I can understand shutting it down to Indian IP ranges, but the whole world? I think they should have stood up to the Indian court and took wikipedia offline for India, otherwise soon there will be avalanche of demands to take down anything negative about modi, trump, xi, and putin.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#96

Post by EasyMark »

utkarsh858 wrote: post #92

The article has not been blocked by Indian government but by Indian judiciary system with a trial, there's a difference. Also trials in India take a lot of time and conclusions are reached after much thought. Also Wikipedia does not have a good track record of its editors free from misleading articles for defamation and propaganda. I won't trust at all the article in Wikipedia about the war between Wikipedia and ANI.…

That’s fine but why do they think they have jurisdiction over the entire planet?

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#97

Post by jltsiren »

smogcutter wrote: post #84
jltsiren wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The legitimacy of Indian courts is something only Indian citizens and people living in India can decide. Other people may have opinions, but they are more or less irrelevant. Anyway, the fundamental issue here is that domestic rulings often have international consequences. As a sovereign state, India obviously has the right to ban the Wikimedia Foundation, or any other foreign entity, from doing business within the c…

> India obviously has the right to ban the Wikimedia Foundation I don’t think that’s obvious at all. In the US, constitutional rights to freedom of speech, assembly, etc apply regardless of nationality or citizenship status.

You are placing too much weight on constitutions. They are just temporary documents a sovereign state can rewrite at any time for any reason. Either by the process established in the existing constitution. Or by having a civil war or a revolution, with the winners deciding that the old constitution is void, because its supporters lost.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#98

Post by utkarsh858 »

EasyMark wrote: post #96
utkarsh858 wrote: post #92

The article has not been blocked by Indian government but by Indian judiciary system with a trial, there's a difference. Also trials in India take a lot of time and conclusions are reached after much thought. Also Wikipedia does not have a good track record of its editors free from misleading articles for defamation and propaganda. I won't trust at all the article in Wikipedia about the war between Wikipedia and ANI.…

That’s fine but why do they think they have jurisdiction over the entire planet?

Yeah that is wrong, but many are under the impression that Indian government has started stomping on free speech and that the judiciary are just completely whimsical.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#99

Post by ziofill »

Rury wrote: post #94
lolinder wrote: post #17

On January 18 2012, Wikipedia went black to draw attention to SOPA [0], a bill they described as one that "could fatally damage the free and open Internet". Since then, we've seen a slow and steady march in the direction we all dreaded. Country after country has decided that they have the right to block content on the "free and open Internet", and business after business (even those who joined the SOPA protests) has…

It's just politics... Replace "open internet" with "land" and imagine countries (ie people) are attempting to block others access to some resource. It was naive to assume that the internet wouldn't adhere the nature of our reality.

That’s not a fair comparison: land is finite in a way that the open internet isn’t.
Post reply on HN