-
Department of Telecommunications Order u/s. 69A IT Act Blocking 32 URLS (2014-12-17, compressed version)
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Dec 31, 2014
—
last modified
Dec 31, 2014 02:48 PM
—
filed under:
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
IT Act,
Censorship
On December 17, 2014, the Dept. of Telecommunications blocked 32 URLs (as it was ordered to do so by the by Dept. of Electronics & IT — specifically the Designated Officer under section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and under the Information Technology (Procedures and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009), those being:
01) https://justpaste.it/
02) http://hastebin.com
03) http://codepad.org
04) http://pastie.org
05) https://pasteeorg
06) http://paste2.org
07) http://slexy.org
08) http://paste4btc.com/
09) http://0bin.net
10) http://www.heypasteit.com
11) http://sourceforge.net/projects/phorkie
12) http://atnsoft.com/textpaster
13) https://archive.org
14) http://www.hpage.com
15) http://www.ipage.com/
16) http://www.webs.com/
17) http://www.weebly.com/
18) http://www.000webhost.com/
19) https://www.freehosting.com
20) https://vimeo.com/
21) http://www.dailymotion.com/
22) http://pastebin.com
23) https://gist.github.com
24) http://www.ipaste.eu
25) https://thesnippetapp.com
26) https://snipt.net
27) http://tny.ct (Tinypaste)
28) https://github.com (gist-it)
29) http://snipplr.com/
30) http://termbin.com
31) http://www.snippetsource.net
32) https://cryptbin.com
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Resources
-
Department of Telecommunications Order u/s. 69A IT Act Blocking 32 URLS
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Dec 31, 2014
—
filed under:
IT Act,
Internet Governance,
Censorship
On December 17, 2014, the Dept. of Telecommunications blocked 32 URLs (as it was ordered to do so by the by Dept. of Electronics & IT — specifically the Designated Officer under section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and under the Information Technology (Procedures and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009), those being:
01) https://justpaste.it/
02) http://hastebin.com
03) http://codepad.org
04) http://pastie.org
05) https://pasteeorg
06) http://paste2.org
07) http://slexy.org
08) http://paste4btc.com/
09) http://0bin.net
10) http://www.heypasteit.com
11) http://sourceforge.net/projects/phorkie
12) http://atnsoft.com/textpaster
13) https://archive.org
14) http://www.hpage.com
15) http://www.ipage.com/
16) http://www.webs.com/
17) http://www.weebly.com/
18) http://www.000webhost.com/
19) https://www.freehosting.com
20) https://vimeo.com/
21) http://www.dailymotion.com/
22) http://pastebin.com
23) https://gist.github.com
24) http://www.ipaste.eu
25) https://thesnippetapp.com
26) https://snipt.net
27) http://tny.ct (Tinypaste)
28) https://github.com (gist-it)
29) http://snipplr.com/
30) http://termbin.com
31) http://www.snippetsource.net
32) https://cryptbin.com
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Resources
-
Overview of the Constitutional Challenges to the IT Act
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Dec 15, 2014
—
last modified
Dec 19, 2014 09:01 AM
—
filed under:
IT Act,
Court Case,
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
Intermediary Liability,
Constitutional Law,
Censorship,
Section 66A,
Article 19(1)(a),
Blocking
There are currently ten cases before the Supreme Court challenging various provisions of the Information Technology Act, the rules made under that, and other laws, that are being heard jointly. Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan who's arguing Anoop M.K. v. Union of India has put together this chart that helps you track what's being challenged in each case.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
The Socratic debate: Whose internet is it anyway?
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Nov 18, 2014
—
last modified
Dec 09, 2014 01:35 PM
—
filed under:
Net Neutrality,
Internet Governance
In the US, President Obama recently spoke out on the seemingly arcane topic of net neutrality. What is more astounding is that the popular satire news show host John Oliver spent a 13-minute segment talking about it in June, telling Internet trolls to “focus your indiscriminate rage in a useful direction” by visiting the US Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) website and submitting comments on its weak draft proposal on net neutrality.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
CIS Statement at ICANN 49's Public Forum
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Mar 27, 2014
—
last modified
Jun 04, 2014 05:31 AM
—
filed under:
IANA,
IG4all,
Internet Governance,
Accountability,
ICANN,
North vs South
This was a statement made by Pranesh Prakash at the ICANN 49 meeting (on March 27, 2014), arguing that ICANN's bias towards the North America and Western Europe result in a lack of legitimacy, and hoping that the IANA transition process provides an opportunity to address this.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
NETmundial Transcript Archive
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Apr 23, 2014
We are archiving the live transcript from the NETmundial meeting (April 23-24, 2014).
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
India's Internet Jam
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Aug 31, 2012
—
last modified
Mar 20, 2014 12:41 PM
—
filed under:
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
Internet Governance,
Censorship
As authorities continue to clamp down on digital freedom, politicians and corporations are getting a taste for censorship too. Pranesh Prakash reports.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
NTIA to give up control of the Internet's root
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Mar 18, 2014
—
last modified
Mar 18, 2014 06:21 PM
—
filed under:
ICANN,
Internet Governance
On Friday evening the U.S. government's National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) announced that it was setting into motion a transition to give up a few powers that it holds over some core Internet functions, and that this would happen by September 2015. Pranesh Prakash provides a brief response to that announcement.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Surveillance and the Indian Constitution - Part 3: The Public/Private Distinction and the Supreme Court’s Wrong Turn
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Feb 25, 2014
—
last modified
Mar 06, 2014 11:02 PM
—
filed under:
Surveillance,
Internet Governance,
Privacy
After its decision in Gobind, the Supreme Court's privacy floodgates opened; a series of claims involving private parties came before its docket, and the resulting jurisprudence ended up creating confusion between state-individual surveillance, and individual-individual surveillance.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Surveillance and the Indian Constitution - Part 2: Gobind and the Compelling State Interest Test
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Jan 27, 2014
—
filed under:
Surveillance,
Constitutional Law,
Internet Governance,
Privacy
Gautam Bhatia analyses the first case in which the Supreme Court recognized a constitutional right to privacy, Gobind v. State of Madhya Pradesh, and argues that the holding in that case adopted the three-pronged American test of strict scrutiny, compelling State interest, and narrow tailoring in its approach to privacy violations.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog