‘...officers are not Tom, Dick, or Harry…': Government to Elon Musk's X over content takedown orders
content moderation
. A lawyer for the social media company argued in
Karnataka high court
that 'every Tom, Dick, and Harry' has been authorised to issue content takedown orders – a statement that drew sharp criticism from the Centre's counsel.
The remarks came during a hearing for X's challenge against a government-run website. X claims this portal is a 'censorship portal' that allows officials to demand content removal, while the government maintains it is a tool to swiftly notify companies of their due diligence obligations regarding online content.
'This is the danger, My Lord…': says X's lawyer
During the court proceedings, X's lawyer, KG Raghavan, highlighted a recent notice from the railways department demanding the removal of a video showing a car on a railway track.
'This is the danger, My Lord, that is done now, if every Tom, Dick, and Harry officer is authorised,' Raghavan told the court.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
The 'Tom, Dick, and Harry' phrasing quickly drew the ire of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who retorted that 'officers are not Tom, Dick, or Harry... they are statutory functionaries.' Mehta emphasised that 'no social media intermediary can expect completely unregulated functioning.'
A case was filed in the court onMarch 5 wherein X argued that the
IT Ministry
is asking other departments to use a government website launched by the Ministry of Home Affairs last year to issue content blocking orders.
This isn't the first time X has been at odds with the Indian government; in 2021, the company faced a standoff over non-compliance with orders to block certain tweets, eventually complying but continuing a court battle related to the issue.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
12 minutes ago
- Economic Times
RBL Bank shares rally 3% as Dubai-based Emirates NBD Bank eyes up to 20% stake
Shares of RBL Bank rose 2.7% to Rs 266.95 on Wednesday after reports said Dubai government-owned Emirates NBD Bank is in talks to acquire up to a 20% stake in the private lender through a significant capital infusion. ADVERTISEMENT The stock, which has rallied more than 21% in the past month and over 64% in the past six, rose for an eighth time in nine sessions. It closed Tuesday at Rs 259.95, up 4.6%, with a market value of Rs 15,831.21 crore. The Emirates NBD Bank PJSC is in advanced discussions to acquire a minority stake in RBL Bank through a preferential allotment. This would mark a primary capital infusion into RBL and help the Dubai-government-owned lender deepen its Asia strategy. The deal, still under negotiation, could be similar in structure to the recent SMBC-Yes Bank investment. Emirates NBD may end up holding around 15–20% of RBL's expanded capital base, just below the open offer threshold, pending regulatory approval. That would translate to an investment of approximately Rs 3,166.24 crore. 'However, the deal is likely to take place at a premium to the current price,' people familiar with the matter told The Economic Times. RBL Bank is entirely publicly owned, with several domestic institutions holding modest stakes. Quant Mutual Fund owns 6.65%, Nippon Life India 3.11%, ICICI Prudential Life 1.06% and LIC 1.19%. Mahindra and Mahindra acquired a 3.48% stake in 2023, while Zerodha holds 1.24%. British International Investment exited its 3.82% holding in April. ADVERTISEMENT The Reserve Bank of India in May granted in-principle approval to Emirates NBD to convert its existing Indian branches in Chennai, Gurugram and Mumbai into a wholly owned subsidiary. The Dubai-based bank also recently launched investment banking operations in India.'There is a deep connect between UAE and India, both diplomatic and commercial. The bank has been eyeing opportunities but has not been very keen to buy into NBFCs (non-banking finance companies) unlike some of their peers,' an industry executive told The Economic Times. 'There is also a lot of synergy in wealth and other product distribution.' ADVERTISEMENT RBL Bank, originally set up 70 years ago in Maharashtra, transformed itself into a national player beginning in 2010, focusing on credit cards and microfinance. However, its differentiated asset strategy is considered cyclical and exposed to stress in unsecured the March quarter, RBL Bank's net profit fell 80% sequentially to Rs 68.7 crore, despite a rise in other income to Rs 1,000 crore. Net interest income dropped 2.3% year-on-year to Rs 1,563 crore. ADVERTISEMENT 'Business growth is gaining traction and slippages are expected to normalise by 2QFY26,' Nitin Aggarwal, analyst at Motilal Oswal told The Economic Times. 'Margins will be flattish to lower before it will claw back up. The trajectory is expected to improve starting FY26. The cards business is expected to grow in the mid-single digits.' Despite the stock's recent rally, analysts say it still trades below book value and remains among the most affordable banking stocks in India, with a P/E ratio of over 21. However, sources caution that talks may not result in a deal. The lender is also exploring a capital raise from institutional investors as a fallback. ADVERTISEMENT If successful, Emirates NBD's move will mark the second major investment from West Asia into an Indian bank this quarter. In April, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and Warburg Pincus committed Rs 7,500 crore to IDFC First Bank. Also read | Emirates NBD eyes RBL Bank stake for India, Asia play (Disclaimer: Recommendations, suggestions, views and opinions given by the experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)
Hindustan Times
17 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
HC directs Centre, Meghalaya govt to respond on 2016 recommendations of Linguistic forum
Shillong, The Meghalaya High Court has directed the Centre and the state government to submit a report if the recommendations on development and welfare of linguistic minorities in the state made by the Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities in 2016 were implemented. HC directs Centre, Meghalaya govt to respond on 2016 recommendations of Linguistic forum Hearing a PIL filed by the Meghalaya Linguistic Minority Development Forum which advocates for the rights of linguistic minorities in the state, the high court noted that while Khasi and Garo-speaking people are dominant, a significant population also speaks Bengali, Nepali, Hindi, Assamese, and other languages. The Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities had in 2016 recommended translation of official documents into minority languages, creation of language preference registers in schools, and official recognition and support for minority language educational institutions among others. A division bench headed by Chief Justice I P Mukerji and Justice W Diengdoh asked both the Centre and the state to clarify the current status of the report before the next hearing scheduled for July 10, 2025. "We direct learned counsel for Union of India and state to take suitable instructions in the matter with regard to the status of the report of the Commissioner dated 29th March, 2016 and report to this court before the returnable date," the order stated. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel also urged the Court to issue instructions to the state government to constitute a Board for Linguistic Welfare which was one of the recommendations made in 2016. In response, the government's counsel argued that the Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities does not hold absolute authority and maintained that the report should be vetted by the President of India and approved by Parliament. The high court has now asked both the state and the Central governments to provide updates and instructions on the matter before the next hearing. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
18 minutes ago
- Time of India
Religious Beliefs vs LGBT books: How conservative parents won bigly
The US Supreme Court has ruled that parents can generally stop their children from attending school lessons that go against their religious beliefs, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday. This case came from Maryland, where some parents objected to LGBTQ-themed books being taught in elementary schools. The court sided with the parents, saying they have the right to decide what their children learn if it clashes with their religion. Conservative groups see this as a big win. Eric Baxter, lawyer for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said public schools should serve parents, not force children 'into conformity.' However, progressive parents and many teachers worry this will hurt schools' ability to teach tolerance. Erica Watkins, who runs a progressive parent group in Oklahoma, said ''parents' rights' has been overused and weaponized to undermine teachers.' How did this movement grow? The push for parental rights took off in 2021 when Terry McAuliffe, a Democratic candidate for Virginia governor, said in a debate, 'I don't think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.' by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 코인 투자금 300만원 있다면 '이렇게'해라 나스닥터 더 알아보기 Undo His Republican rival, Glenn Youngkin, used this to win the election, sparking a nationwide conservative movement demanding more control over schools. Groups like Moms for Liberty, formed in Florida in 2021, grew quickly. They trained school board candidates and wore shirts reading 'We do not co-parent with the government.' Co-founder Tiffany Justice told WSJ that parents are becoming 'more emboldened.' What happens next? Former President Donald Trump backed Moms for Liberty during his 2024 campaign, saying, 'I'm for parental rights all the way.' He also praised Friday's court ruling. Conservative lawyers believe the ruling will help parents fight other school policies, such as rules about students' pronouns and names. Luke Berg from Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty said it's hard to see how parents will lose such cases if they cite religious reasons. But school officials are worried about how to handle students who opt out. Zachary Schurin, a lawyer for Connecticut schools, said teachers will have to find staff to supervise these students during lessons they skip. Could progressives use this too? Some progressive parents are using parental rights laws to opt out of lessons they disagree with. In Oklahoma, Erica Watkins encouraged parents to pull their children out of new social studies classes that question the 2020 election results. In another case, parents argued that bans on gender-transition care for minors violate their rights to raise their children as they see fit. The Supreme Court rejected one such case in Tennessee but did not rule directly on parental rights. 'As a parent, I know my child better than any government official ever will,' said Samantha Williams, a mother involved in the Tennessee lawsuit. Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
