Elon Musk: X is suing India, as Tesla and Starlink plan entry
An Indian court is due to hear a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk's social media company X, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government of misusing the law to censor content on its platform.Last month, X sued the government saying a new website - Sahyog - launched by the federal home ministry last year, was being used to expand its censorship powers and take down content.X argued the portal gave government officials wide-ranging powers to issue blocking orders that were "in violation" of India's digital laws. It said it could not be compelled to join Sahyog, which it called a "censorship portal". The Indian government has said that the portal is necessary to tackle harmful online content.
Other American technology giants such as Amazon, Google and Meta have agreed to be on Sahyog.Sahyog describes itself as a portal developed to automate the process of sending government notices to content intermediaries like X and Facebook.The lawsuit filed in the southern state of Karnataka came after the federal railway ministry ordered X to remove "hundreds of posts". These included videos of a crush in Delhi in which 18 people died as they were making their way to the world's largest religious gathering, the Kumbh Mela.In its petition, X argues that the portal and the orders issued through it fall outside the remit of the original law that allows the government to block content.Under this law, senior officials have the power to issue takedown orders, but after following due procedure like giving notices, opportunities for hearings and allowing for a review of any decision.But X says the government is bypassing these procedures to issue arbitrary content takedown orders through other legal provisions that have no safeguards.As a result, "countless" government officials, including "tens of thousands of local police officers", are "unilaterally and arbitrarily" issuing orders, X argues in its petition.India's federal IT and home ministries did not respond to the BBC's request for comment.In court, the government has argued that its actions are lawful. It said it was not sending blocking orders but only issuing "notices" to platforms against unlawful content. The government also defended the Sahyog platform saying it was a "necessity" because of the "growing volume of unlawful and harmful content online".
The case is of "vital importance" as the blocking mechanism of the Sahyog portal has resulted in "a wholesale increase in censorship", said Apar Gupta of the digital rights organisation, Internet Freedom Foundation.This is not the first time the Indian government and X are at loggerheads.The Delhi police had raided the offices of X (then Twitter) in 2021, before Musk took over, after a tweet by a ruling party spokesperson was marked as "manipulated media".In 2022, the company had sued the Indian government against blocking orders, at least one of which pertained to a year-long protest by farmers against new laws brought in by the government. However, the court ruled against the company and imposed a fine of 5m rupees ($58,000; £45,000).Under Musk's leadership, X appealed against this decision, which is currently separately being heard in the Karnataka high court.In 2023, India called X a "habitual non-compliant platform" during the appeal proceedings.India is also reportedly investigating X's chatbot Grok regarding its use of inappropriate language and "controversial responses" after it made politically sensitive comments to user prompts recently. The timing of the lawsuit is interesting as it comes when Musk's other companies Starlink and Tesla have just begun making inroads into India with their business plans.Earlier in March, Starlink signed an agreement with two of India's biggest telecoms firms to bring satellite internet to India and is awaiting government approval to start providing its services.Tesla could finally be making its debut and has begun hiring for a dozen jobs in Delhi and Mumbai. It is also reportedly hunting for showrooms in both cities.Musk also met Prime Minister Modi when he visited the White House last month.His growing business interests in India and closeness with US President Donald Trump give him "ample leverage" with India, Michael Kugelman, director of the Wilson Centre's South Asia Institute in Washington, told the BBC."This means he has a lot of leeway in terms of how he operates, including making a decision to sue the Indian government," he added, saying the case might not hurt Musk's business prospects in the country.Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
31 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Macron labels Trump's Iran air strikes 'illegal', pressures Starmer to take a stand
Emmanuel Macron has hit out at Donald Trump's air strikes on Iran, branding them 'illegal' and deepening the row over whether the US action broke international law French President Emmanuel Macron has strongly condemned the US air strikes on Iran, deeming them "illegal" and fuelling the debate over whether the American action violated international law. Macron stated that while targeting nuclear facilities posing a threat may be seen as "legitimate", the recent strikes by the US and Israel lacked a valid legal basis. Macron's comments came as UK Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer and senior government officials refrained from explicitly endorsing or condemning US President Donald Trump's decision, despite growing pressure for the Prime Minister to take a clear stance. The UK Prime Minister had been cautioned by Attorney General Lord Hermer that participating in a US-led attack could put Britain in violation of international law. Unlike Macron, Starmer has not denounced the bombing, seemingly aligning with the Attorney General's advice. Starmer appeared to appreciate the outcome of the US bombing, stating it would "alleviate" the Iran nuclear issue, prompting accusations of accepting the consequence of the bombing while not endorsing the method itself, reports the Express. The US strikes came after European leaders spent a week publicly and privately urging Trump to avoid unilateral action. Instead, the US conducted a surprise stealth attack on three Iranian nuclear sites, which Trump hailed as a mission that left all targets "obliterated." The decision has sparked serious concerns about the potential influence of Sir Keir and other Western leaders on President Trump's global strategy. This follows the US president's abrupt departure from the G7 summit in Canada last week, with another confrontation anticipated at the upcoming Nato summit in The Hague on Wednesday. Speaking to journalists, Mr Macron remarked: "It may be considered legitimate... to neutralise nuclear facilities in Iran, given our objectives. "However, there is no legal framework, no. And so we must say it as it is: there is no legality to these strikes. "Even though France shares the objective of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, we have consistently believed from the outset that this can only be achieved through diplomatic and technical means. "I say this because I hear many commentators who basically accuse you of inefficiency when you defend the diplomatic route on these issues. But when you are consistent, you can claim to be effective." He continued: "We continue to believe that it is through negotiation and re-engagement that we can achieve our goals." Norway's Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store supported this view, stating: "International law has some clear principles on the use of force. It can be granted by the Security Council or it can be in pure self-defence," thus indicating that the US attacks fall "outside the realm of international law". Mr Macron's stance contrasted sharply with the views expressed by Germany and NATO chief Mark Rutte, who maintained that the preemptive US intervention was lawful. When queried about how the scenario equates to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Mr Rutte asserted: "My biggest fear would be for Iran to own and be able to use and deploy a nuclear weapon to be a stranglehold on Israel, on the whole region and other parts of the world. "This is a consistent position of Nato: Iran should not have its hands on a nuclear weapon," he added. "I would not agree that this is against international law - what the US did." Similarly, Friedrich Merz, the Chancellor of Germany, supported the actions of the US and Israel stating there was "no reason to criticise" their tactics, arguing that it wasn't feasible to leave Iran's nuclear progress unchallenged. Back in Westminster, Ministers echoed Mr Macron's prudent approach. Numerous ministers sidestepped giving a direct endorsement of the bombings as either lawful or substantiated, opting instead to convey relief that Iran's development towards a nuclear armament was hindered. Questioned about the strikes' legal status on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Foreign Secretary David Lammy responded: "Well, we weren't involved, it's for the Americans to discuss those issues."
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Amazon to invest £40bn in UK - with more warehouses and thousands of new jobs
Amazon has said it will invest £40bn in the UK over the next three years as it creates thousands of jobs and opens four new warehouses. The online shopping giant will build two huge fulfilment centres in the East Midlands, which it expects to open in 2027. The exact locations are still to be revealed. Two others - in Hull and Northampton - were previously announced and are set to be finished this year and in 2026 respectively, with 2,000 jobs expected at each site. Amazon is already one of the country's biggest private employers - with around 75,000 staff. Two new buildings will also go up at its corporate headquarters in east London, while other investment includes new delivery stations, upgrading its transport network and redeveloping Bray Film Studios in Berkshire - which it bought last year. The £40bn figure also includes most of the £8bn announced in 2024 for building and maintaining UK data centres, as well as staff wages and benefits. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the investment into Amazon's third-biggest market after the US and Germany was a "massive vote of confidence in the UK as the best place to do business". "It means thousands of new jobs - real opportunities for people in every corner of the country to build careers, learn new skills, and support their families," said Sir Keir. The chancellor, Rachel Reeves, said it was a "powerful endorsement of Britain's economic strengths". Amazon chief executive Andy Jassy stressed the investment would benefit communities across the UK. "When Amazon invests, it's not only in London and the South East," he said. "We're bringing innovation and job creation to communities throughout England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, strengthening the UK's economy and delivering better experiences for customers wherever they live." However, Amazon's immense power and size continues to raise concerns among some regulators, unions and campaigners. There have long been claims over potentially dangerous conditions at its warehouses - denied by the company, while last week Britain's grocery regulator launched an investigation into whether it breached rules on supplier payments.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
West's imperial arrogance takes propaganda to farcical levels
Those old enough will remember this well in the lead-up to and during the Iraq War – the flashing graphics, the rising excitement and the maps showing where the carnage was about to erupt. At no point is the jingoism higher. Across all platforms, from Fox News to CNN, you will find a well-manicured presenter waxing lyrical about the 'Fordow nuclear site buried deep into a mountain'. As if they had any clue about what this was, or even the slightest knowledge the word 'Fordow' existed before the last few days. Now they are experts, but more than that, they are equipped with the ability to make sweeping moral judgments as if they were holy writs. This is the line, and if you deviate from it, you are suspect. READ MORE: Iran announces it has attacked US forces stationed at air base in Qatar This, of course, is not news. It's propaganda. We go from increasingly critical coverage of the Gaza genocide, to a new and sudden reality. Yes, what is happening to the Palestinians is bad, but Iran must not 'get the bomb'. That is the starting point for the discussion. Everything else must be pushed to one side for this to dominate the airwaves and set the parameters for what is right and wrong. As if Iran is a Bond villain and not a country with thousands of years of history, 92 million people and a place at the pulsing heart of global trade. But not only do they want a bomb, they are going to immediately set it off in Israel – despite the fact they themselves would be incinerated within an hour of doing so. Rationality is not possible for any other nation outside of the West, you understand. It is we who are the most advanced, the most democratic and the most reasonable. Yes, Ted Cruz – a lead proponent for war with Iran and a US senator– doesn't know the population of the country he wants to set alight. But that doesn't matter: he is an American and his name is Ted. Let's get back to those parameters. You are allowed to give an opinion on whether Iran should have 'the bomb', as long as the answer is no. (Image: Kayla Bartkowski, Getty Images) But don't try to get into any of the wider context. That is a cardinal sin, as it might open up an avenue of critical thought. And critical thought is not to be encouraged. In the case of Iran, the immediate backdrop could not be more stark. As it was about to embark on a new round of diplomatic talks with the United States, in a matter of mere days, Israel assassinated Iran's lead negotiators and blew up a war. It just had to be done. They were simply too close to getting nuclear warheads in place and launching them. Despite the fact that no intelligence briefing states this – indeed, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency stated that they could not affirm that there was 'any systematic effort' by Iran to manufacture a nuke. But forget all of that, and don't ask too many questions about why the world should accept a state committing an active genocide should also be forgiven for killing – literally, not metaphorically – via diplomatic talks. You don't support Iran, do you? Some took the mental gymnastics to Olympian levels. After the stealth bombers unleashed their payload, France, Germany and Britain released a joint statement. Bizarrely, the thrust of their intervention was to urge Iran 'back to the negotiating table'. No, you are not going mad. Yes, they were at said table. Yes, Israel then obliterated said table. Yes, the US conducted airstrikes, in violation of the United Nations charter. But the key point is that Iran returns to the talks. Naturally, accepting this framing of events necessarily relieves one of any intellectual self-respect they may once have had. So it is fitting that such nonsense is regurgitated by talking heads and politicians who dispensed with any such thing long ago in the name of career advancement. But the vast majority of the population – who according to polls want nothing to do with a war on Iran – are not so easily swayed by such evident absurdity. And all the while, Gaza continues to starve. It is not only that Famine is being utilised as a weapon, as is aid. Every day there are new atrocities with people being shot, maimed and killed in the search for a bag of flour. Yet it is the state responsible for this that simply must have our unconditional support. It is standing between western civilisation and oblivion. Or, in the words of Germany's chancellor Friedrich Merz, they are 'doing our dirty work'. So cast aside the bodies of more than tens of thousands – or more – tens of thousands of dead Palestinians. Compartmentalise the deliberate humiliation they are being forced to endure. Deny the genocide. Don't you get it: Iran must not get the bomb. And what's more, we will pontificate about this not just on news programmes, we will also do it on frothy breakfast television, interspersed with travel advice in case your holiday to Turkey or Cyprus might be affected. We might even publish a wanted war criminal, complete with an International Criminal Court arrest warrant, in our pages to promote yet more war, like The Times did with former Israeli defence minister Yoav Gallant. When all is said and done, this is nothing more than the old-school colonial mindset: one rule for them, one for us. And if those on the receiving end of mass death and torture are brown-skinned, we can move that down the agenda for a while longer. Except there is a problem. There is, alongside this choir of ignorance and imperial arrogance, a mass awakening taking place. People are not buying it; they are not drinking the Kool Aid. As our political leaders detach from reality at something approaching escape velocity, they lose grip over the ability to lie us into another war. The world is in a dark place but times are changing. Simply put, the people have had enough.
