Websites blocked in India

Last updated

India censors websites through Court orders as per IT Act 2000. Most of these bans are instigated under copyright and trademark infringement without proper security measures and lists that they provide without proper research or professional technical services. The current blocks are initiated by ISPs under court order for blocking the illegal sites themselves with a warning that says, "the site accessed is currently deemed to be illegal". Many of the sites listed may be occasionally or even regularly available, depending on the access or change of current events.

Contents

Bans and blocks

Over the years, the government has banned thousands of websites and URLs in the country with the help of internet service providers or under the directive of the courts. For example, in August 2015, the government banned at least 857 sites for their pornographic contents and in June 2016, the government further banned over 200 URLs for providing 'Escort Services'. [1]

In August 2015, the Central government of India ordered TRAI and Internet Service Providers based in India to ban domestic and international porn websites. In response, nearly 857 websites were blocked. [2] Star India Pvt Ltd, an entertainment company owned by 21st Century Fox have successfully gained authorization through hoodwinking the court. They can now force ISPs to block entire websites to tackle Internet piracy and sharing for their copyrighted content. This was gained through falsifying data that these sites are uploading videos when it is a user centered activity and covering up the fact each of these websites have active departments to regulate any sorts of infringement and misuse of their services. Prathiba M Singh, who had represented Star India, cited poor resources of media giants like Star India, for targeting these domains without block expiry period and their legal team termed these sites as "rogue sites" and expressed delight in their successive filing from 2014 and incognito win to violate freedom of trade on the Internet at least in India. Though some critics say this would be lifted eventually by seeing the fallacy as in similar previous cases. [3] Many people have raised their voice through social media that the proceedings being overly suspicious and was gained for an alternate means, which is aimed for profiting rather than the initial spike of alleged piracy of these copyrighted contents and strengthening an ongoing practice of bottle-necking the internet users to forced payment and culture of on-demand online access to content. [4] [5] This has happened in the same week were media personnel's filter-free over indulgences to manipulate ongoing cases and political statements without any guidelines were appalled by Lawyers in the country. [6] [7]

In 2016, India also put forwarded a new plan to control internet usage of its netizen's. Accessing or pop-ups from ad services or malware infection of websites banned in India might invite 3 years of jail sentence and a fine of Rs 3 lakh. As of now URLs and websites were blocked using DNS-filtering. This means the DNS of the blocked site was added to a list maintained by the internet service provider and whenever a user tried connecting to that site, the DNS server of the internet service provider would block that request. The respected officials suspect netizens are circumventing these measures knowingly or unknowingly. Government also intends to provide wide educative information classes, provision of free operating system with utilities for malware free access to internet and for computerized activities of daily life as a primary method. Currently the government are joining hands with media content providers and internet service providers like big companies Tata Communications and Airtel to manage a number of internet gateways in India. Though many legal, technical and social action groups consider this as a threatening approach. Many social action groups say that these as inappropriate time and money spend while real issues like unemployment, access to education, freedom of practicing religion, women and children safety, drug use are ever rising. Lawyers with technical background say this might be warning message and DNS filtering is a better practice for enforcing Anti-piracy laws in current India. Some of them are also wary about how will these actions get reflected in terms hostility towards human rights, implications of these fines, profiteering stakeholders agendas, is it the government's first step to a long-term plan "monitoring the whole World Wide Web" as China does. Many of these services are malvertising, click away access and pops ups, how does the government intend to tackle these issues and problems with the current plan that is heavily in favor of corporation's margin and doesn't cater to its users needs. Other groups express their fear and uneasiness whether these will lead to emergency era like arrests where anything that government bodies believe is an "offence under the laws of India, including but not limited to under Sections 63, 63-A, 65 and 65-A of the Copyright Act, 1957". [8]

Warning that allegedly created for TATA and Airtel users with threats implied beyond normal DoT remainder and block message shows as: [9]

This URL has been blocked under the instructions of the Competent Government Authority or in compliance with the orders of a Court of competent jurisdiction. Viewing, downloading, exhibiting or duplicating an illicit copy of the contents under this URL is punishable as an offence under the laws of India, including but not limited to under Sections 63, 63-A, 65 and 65-A of the Copyright Act, 1957 which prescribe imprisonment for three years and also fine of up to Rs. 3,00,000/-. Any person aggrieved by any such blocking of this URL may contact at urlblock [at] tatacommunications [dot] com who will, within 48 hours, provide you the details of relevant proceedings under which you can approach the relevant High Court or Authority for redressal of your grievance

Factors that led to these sudden moves are reported to be influence of film studios in India and courts who have regularly issued orders in the favor for them. Often these are done with the contracted lawyers of film studios approach courts in regular intervals ahead and after a movie's release seeking preventive blocks on the URLs they compile and list. This lists in reality are unprofessionally and "poorly compiled and often block is sought on full websites just on the basis of whims and fancies". "Once this order are issued, the copies of the order along with the list of URLs to be blocked go to DoT, which then they pass an order to internet service providers to block these sites". The interesting part here is that once a URL is blocked it remains blocked, even years after the release of the film without an expiry. Patent lawyers also suggest to make practical changes in its laws according to the current e-environment like making materials accessible within six months to one year and protecting the content from manipulation and creative infringement of the same under copyright laws to lessen the current piracy problems. [10]

On September 27, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued an order received by the Ministry of Electronics and IT [MEITY] on October 8, 2018, which said:
"... all the internet service licensees are instructed to take immediate necessary action for blocking of 827 websites as per the direction from MEITY and for the compliance of the Hon’ble High Court order." Meity informed DoT to issue an order to telecom companies and ISPs for the same. While originally the list by the High Court had 857 entries, Meity found 30 portals without any pornographic content, hence the change. Complete action will be done before 15 December and after that all the 827 websites will blocked by every ISP of India. According to officials, it was said that there won't be any way that these websites will be stay unblocked by any ISP and no ISP will allow access to any of the website mentioned in the list provided by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India. [11]

List of blocked websites

List of websites monitored by Markscan on behalf of MSM for alternatives and mirror url to be blocked if any new url created by the websites.

Alexa RankWebsiteDomainURLCategoryPrimary languageRef(s)
1,804 Tamil Rockers tamilrockers.wstamilrockers.comTorrentEnglish [12]
1,868Streamablestreamable.comstreamable.commedia and video streamingEnglish [13]
107,581Uploadsatuploadsat.comuploadsat.comFile StorageEnglish
432torrentz.eutorrentz.eutorrentz.euTorrent SharingEnglish
823yourvideohost.comyourvideohost.comyourvideohost.commedia and video streamingEnglish
xpau.sexpau.sexpau.selatest movie and TV series in hdEnglish
Sendit.cloudSendit.cloudSendit.cloudCloud sharingEnglish
193 TikTok tiktok.comtiktok.comSocial NetworkingEnglish [14]
Gogoanimegogoanime.tvgogoanime.tvmedia and video streamingEnglish
9Anime9anime.to9anime.tomedia and video streamingEnglish/Japanese
Newgrounds newgrounds.comnewgrounds.comEntertainmentEnglish
BannedThoughtbannedthought.netbannedthought.netInformation/NewsEnglish [15]
1862Fmoviesfmovies.tofmovies.toVideo streamingEnglish
4897Proxysiteproxysite.comproxysite.comWeb Proxy ServiceEnglish
Tecknixtecknix.comtecknix.comMinecraft ClientEnglish

See also

Related Research Articles

Content-control software, commonly referred to as an Internet filter, is software that restricts or controls the content an Internet user is capable to access, especially when utilised to restrict material delivered over the Internet via the Web, Email, or other means. Content-control software determines what content will be available or be blocked.

Internet censorship in Australia is enforced by both the country's criminal law as well as voluntarily enacted by internet service providers. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has the power to enforce content restrictions on Internet content hosted within Australia, and maintain a blocklist of overseas websites which is then provided for use in filtering software. The restrictions focus primarily on child pornography, sexual violence, and other illegal activities, compiled as a result of a consumer complaints process.

Internet censorship in Pakistan

Internet censorship in Pakistan is government control of information sent and received using the Internet in Pakistan. There have been significant instances of website access restriction in Pakistan, most notably when YouTube was banned from 2012–2016. Pakistan has asked a number of social media organisations to set up local offices within the country, but this is yet to happen.

Internet censorship in India Overview of Internet censorship in India

Internet censorship in India is done by both central and state governments. DNS filtering and educating service users in suggested usages is an active strategy and government policy to regulate and block access to Internet content on a large scale. Also measures for removing content at the request of content creators through court orders have become more common in recent years. Initiating a mass surveillance government project like Golden Shield Project is also an alternative discussed over the years by government bodies.

Internet censorship Control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the internet

Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the Internet enacted by regulators, or on their own initiative. Internet censorship puts restrictions on what information can be put on the internet or not. Individuals and organizations may engage in self-censorship for moral, religious, or business reasons, to conform to societal norms, due to intimidation, or out of fear of legal or other consequences.

File sharing is the practice of distributing or providing access to digital media, such as computer programs, multimedia, program files, documents or electronic books/magazines. It involves various legal aspects as it is often used to exchange data that is copyrighted or licensed.

Internet censorship in Singapore is carried out by the Media Development Authority (MDA). Internet services provided by the three major Internet service providers (ISPs) are subject to regulation by the MDA, which requires blocking of a symbolic number of websites containing "mass impact objectionable" material, including Playboy, YouPorn and Ashley Madison. The civil service, tertiary institutions and Institute of Technical Education has its own jurisdiction to block websites displaying pornography, information about drugs and online piracy.

Internet censorship in the United Kingdom is conducted under a variety of laws, judicial processes, administrative regulations and voluntary arrangements. It is achieved by blocking access to sites as well as the use of laws that criminalise publication or possession of certain types of material. These include English defamation law, the Copyright law of the United Kingdom, regulations against incitement to terrorism and child pornography.

Censorship in Denmark has been prohibited since 1849 by the Constitution:

§ 77: Any person shall be at liberty to publish his ideas in print, in writing, and in speech, subject to his being held responsible in a court of law. Censorship and other preventive measures shall never again be introduced.

File sharing in the United Kingdom relates to the distribution of digital media in that country. In 2010, there were over 18.3 million households connected to the Internet in the United Kingdom, with 63% of these having a broadband connection. There are also many public Internet access points such as public libraries and Internet cafes.

Countries blocking access to The Pirate Bay Overview about countries blocking access to The Pirate Bay

This is a list of countries where at least one internet service provider (ISP) formerly or currently censors the popular file sharing website The Pirate Bay (TPB).

The precise number of websites blocked in Belgium is unknown. Blocking may vary from one Internet Service Provider (ISP) to another with some sites blocked by some ISPs and not by others.

The precise number of websites blocked in the United Kingdom is unknown. Blocking techniques vary from one Internet service provider (ISP) to another with some sites or specific URLs blocked by some ISPs and not others. Websites and services are blocked using a combination of data feeds from private content-control technology companies, government agencies, NGOs, court orders in conjunction with the service administrators who may or may not have the power to unblock, additionally block, appeal or recategorise blocked content.

The child abuse image content URL list is a list of URLs and image hashes provided by the Internet Watch Foundation to its partners to enable the blocking of child pornography & criminally obscene adult content in the UK and by major international technology companies.

Geo-blocking or geoblocking is technology that restricts access to Internet content based upon the user's geographical location. In a geo-blocking scheme, the user's location is determined using Internet geolocation techniques, such as checking the user's IP address against a blacklist or whitelist, accounts, and measuring the end-to-end delay of a network connection to estimate the physical location of the user. The result of this check is used to determine whether the system will approve or deny access to the website or to particular content. The geolocation may also be used to modify the content provided, for example, the currency in which goods are quoted, the price or the range of goods that are available, besides other aspects.

GitHub has been the target of censorship from governments using methods ranging from local Internet service provider blocks, intermediary blocking using methods such as DNS hijacking and man-in-the-middle attacks, and denial-of-service attacks on GitHub's servers from countries including China, India, Russia, and Turkey. In all of these cases, GitHub has been eventually unblocked after backlash from users and technology businesses or compliance from GitHub.

Sci-Hub is a shadow library website that provides free access to millions of research papers and books, without regard to copyright, by bypassing publishers' paywalls in various ways. Sci-Hub was founded by Alexandra Elbakyan in 2011 in Kazakhstan in response to the high cost of research papers behind paywalls. The site is extensively used worldwide. In September 2019, the site's owners said that it served approximately 400,000 requests per day and in 2021 that had risen to 2 million requests per day. The number of articles in Sci-Hub's library is frequently updated on the site's home page, being over 85 million in February 2021.

Putlocker Online illegal movie streaming site network

Putlocker is any of various online file hosting index websites used for streaming entertainment media, particularly films and television series, for free. The initial website originated in the United Kingdom as early as 2011, and grew to receive millions of daily visitors after the shutdown of Megaupload. In May 2016, the website was blocked in the UK by a High Court order, and at its peak prior to a temporary closure in late 2016, Alexa Internet listed Putlocker as ranking among the top 250 most-visited websites worldwide. Putlocker has been reported by the Motion Picture Association (MPA) as a major piracy threat.

Quad9

Quad9 is a global public recursive DNS resolver which aims to protect users from malware and phishing. Quad9 is operated by the Quad9 Foundation, a Swiss public-benefit, not-for-profit foundation with the purpose of improving the privacy and cybersecurity of Internet users, headquartered in Zurich. It is the only global public resolver which is operated not-for-profit, in the public benefit. Quad9 is entirely subject to Swiss privacy law, and the Swiss government extends that protection of law to Quad9's users throughout the world, regardless of citizenship or country of residence. Quad9 is currently the only global recursive resolver which is not subject to United States law, as the others are each domiciled in the San Francisco Bay Area and governed by the Northern District of California US Federal Court.

References

  1. "Banned URLs: Here is the full list of the blocked websites". Zee News. Archived from the original on 28 April 2017. Retrieved 30 April 2017.
  2. "Why India's order to block 857 websites might not work". Indian Express. PTI. Archived from the original on 25 August 2015. Retrieved 22 August 2015.
  3. M.N, Parth; Bengali, Shashank (5 August 2015). "India reverses ban on Internet porn after public outrage, ridicule". Archived from the original on 5 June 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017 via The Sydney Morning Herald.
  4. "Delhi High Ccourt wants 73 websites banned for streaming pirated videos". 1 August 2016. Archived from the original on 4 June 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017.
  5. "Delhi HC upholds blocking for pirate websites - Times of India". Archived from the original on 30 December 2016. Retrieved 26 May 2017.
  6. "Lawyers beat up media reporters at Kerala High Court - Times of India". Archived from the original on 4 January 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017.
  7. "'No ban imposed on journalists in reporting court proceedings'". Press Trust of India. 30 July 2016. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017 via Business Standard.
  8. "You may get 3 years in jail, fine of 3 lakhs for viewing a torrent site in India - Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis". 21 August 2016. Archived from the original on 22 May 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017.
  9. "You may face 3 years jail term for viewing Torrent websites in India - Gadgets Now". Gadget Now. Archived from the original on 26 August 2016. Retrieved 26 May 2017.
  10. "Are you a criminal now? Users may get 3 years in jail for viewing torrent site, blocked URL in India". Archived from the original on 2 June 2017. Retrieved 26 May 2017.
  11. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2018-10-29. Retrieved 2018-11-01.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  12. "Delhi HC Directs Internet Service Providers to Block Tamilrockers for Unauthorised Movie Screening". News18. Archived from the original on 2019-09-14. Retrieved 2019-10-26.
  13. "How Websites & VPNs Gradually Being Blocked In India Is A Danger To Access Of Ideas & Opinions". IndiaTimes. 2019-03-17. Retrieved 2020-06-14.
  14. "India's TikTok Ban Dispels the Myth of the 'China Bogeyman'". Wired. ISSN   1059-1028 . Retrieved 2020-07-07.
  15. "Police block a website which allegedly poses threat to India's Democracy". MumbaiLive. 2019-02-24. Retrieved 2021-02-24.

[1]

  1. "India bans 59 Chinese apps including TikTok, WeChat, Helo". The Economic Times. 2019-07-19. Retrieved 2021-05-04.