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

Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 321 posts

Re: Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

#71

Post by smashah »

anon261114 wrote: post #59
smashah wrote: post #5

It's concerning that YC is funding companies that are so aligned with BJP bigotry that they comply with invasion of privacy requests without a court order.

I give zero sympathy or support to BJP and its destruction of India's democratic institutions. Yet, I can't agree with your comment. First, I don't think Razorpay supports BJP or its bigotry, at least openly. One indicator of that is that they have retained critical media like AltNews and Wire as customers from years. I don't think they'd do that if they were pro-BJP or pro-bigotry. Plus, I've noticed that rightwing…

neutrality in the face of bigotry seems like alignment, or at least it's a sign of a larger problem which you've very clearly laid out.

I think it's time to consider Boycotting, divestment and sanctions of India since it's flat-spinning into the clutches of full-on fascism.

Very sad.

Re: Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

#73

Post by sa1 »

sateesh wrote: post #15
ghoomketu wrote: post #4

While I have no sympathy for razorpay but I'd just like to point out that laws in India are much more heavy handed than a country like US. People are thrown in jail for social media posts and sometimes just for liking a social media post(1) Twitter has been having a very hard time operating in India too(2) and routinely censoring stuff so while IANAL just remember that things are very different in different parts of…

But as the article suggests why was there a need to share data of all donors, they could have shared only those that originated outside India.

There were no transactions originating outside India, the payments were configured to accept only Indian cards.

Re: Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

#75

Post by lazyninja987 »

smashah wrote: post #5

It's concerning that YC is funding companies that are so aligned with BJP bigotry that they comply with invasion of privacy requests without a court order.

I dont think it has anything to do with BJP. Congress in the past too jailed people for criticizing sonia gandhi over social media.

It was facebook of the past.

Having said that, razor pay has very less options here. Anti-money laundering laws across the world record sender-reciever details out-of-the-box even though the transaction is as benign as buying a box of chocolates.

In this scenario, govt came back to collect information, which it asked razorpay to collect as part of book keeping.

Re: Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

#76

Post by flak48 »

This is the unfortunate reality of India; the government/police don't need to actually go to court. It can harass companies and executives by simply threatening to / actually carrying out unnecessary 'raids' through the tax department.

The usual process is for the a bunch of policemen and beareaucrats to just show up unannounced; seal the office so that no one can enter or leave, and seize computers / phones, files and demand random stuff like invoices for $10 purchases from three years ago and so on. This can happen regularly until all business basically comes to a halt (unless the company complies with whatever the government wants). [1]

The next step is to threaten arrests and actually carry out some arrests on trumped up charge, and you can wait forever until trial (unless you comply with what the government wants). The trials usually result in acquittal after several years but the process is the punishment. The media in the meanwhile is happy to go along with the official version (that the company is question is allegedly employing shady accounting practices).

The next stage is painting the company as 'anti national', arrange for a few mobs to harrass folks / attempt lynchings and finally actually 'dissappear'/kill people (this last step is usually reserved for judges/writers etc since others usually comply before this step)

[1]: https://www.economist.com/asia/2021/10/02/indias-government-...

Re: Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

#77

Post by [deleted] »

kasey_junk wrote: post #24
anovikov wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is billed as "world's largest democracy". Wtf is the bullshit we are made to believe? Why don't we just stop pretending and relabel most "democratic" countries as just "pro-Westnern"?

India is pretty decidedly not pro Western and hasn’t been since independence.

[deleted]

Re: Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

#79

Post by throwaway_1928 »

thway_nohitler wrote: post #27

This is very sad to see, and makes me really worry about the people who got their names handed to the police. The current jingoistic BJP regime is doing all sorts of authoratarian things in India, like demolishing housing for merely taking part in protests [0]. They have also used facial recognition techniques to identify mere protesters and punish them severely [1]. They put a doctor in jail for saving lives of kids…

Referencing the BBC and the Wire here is the equivalent of quoting the WaPo when discussing Trump.

Re: Tell HN: Razorpay a YC company shared donor data under a Section 91 order

#80

Post by ahamedirshad123 »

sateesh wrote: post #15
ghoomketu wrote: post #4

While I have no sympathy for razorpay but I'd just like to point out that laws in India are much more heavy handed than a country like US. People are thrown in jail for social media posts and sometimes just for liking a social media post(1) Twitter has been having a very hard time operating in India too(2) and routinely censoring stuff so while IANAL just remember that things are very different in different parts of…

But as the article suggests why was there a need to share data of all donors, they could have shared only those that originated outside India.

LoL. They don't recieve payment from foreign countries.
Post reply on HN