• conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      You can’t give a deranged dictatorship global censorship authority.

      That keeps the entire planet from access to information.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          They already have the capability to block content locally.

          There isn’t a worse option than allowing a government to globally block an article.

          • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            They already have the capability to block content locally.

            If by “They” you mean Wikipedia, they don’t. Contempt of court risks excluding all Indian editors and readers from using Wikipedia along with hefty fines.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              Yes, they do. They’ve done it in the past.

              It literally doesn’t matter what Indian courts rule. Being banned from India is orders and orders of magnitude more acceptable than blocking a single article anywhere else on the planet. It single handedly eliminates all of their credibility.

              India isn’t capable of enforcing fines against an organization that doesn’t operate in their country and there’s no chance a US court will enforce such an unhinged judgement. They can’t be forced to pay.

              • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                could you link to examples of the past?

                Information is the power behind revolutions and popular democracy. I’d be surprised if the WMF didn’t check a web archive before taking down the article. The court case was already all over worldwide news before that anyways. If they took the article down from archives, that’d be a different story.

                India isn’t capable of enforcing fines against an organization that doesn’t operate in their country

                You serve a website in that country, you operate in that country. What say you about the GDPR?

                • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  No, I have no interest in digging through their history. But it’s less than trivial to do. Any random no name site can do it in 5 minutes with any source of the geo-mapping information, with virtually no knowledge required. It is not work.

                  GDPR can do literally nothing but block any site that doesn’t have finances under their jurisdiction, and they shouldn’t be able to. No one else will enforce their fines for them. It’s no different than Russia fining Google more money than exists. You can’t just magically rob someone because you’re a country.

                  • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    Could you at least give me some keywords to search?

                    Firstly, Wikimedia does have many usergroup organizations (i.e. subchapters) in India. And even without that, my point is that Wikipedia can’t shut down in India.