Complainant argues - Google modifies content, is not merely a host

If you thought the calm in the ongoing court case against 21 social networking sites in the country, meant it's all over, then here's something. Vinay Rai, the journalist who sparked off a controversy when he filed a complaint against Google, Facebook, YouTube, among others accusing them of carrying objectionable content, now has fresh accusations against Google. Advocate H. Hariharan, who appeared in the court, on behalf of Vinay Rai stated that Google's statements that there was no way in which they could pre-screen content before it went up on their sites is false, and that Google is not a mere host to the content, since it modifies it. A report in The Economic Times, quoted Advocate H. Hariharan as saying, "Google reserves the right to review, modify, remove, filter and refuse the contents posted on its site. This is illegal omission on the part of Google."

& the trial continues ... (Image credit: Getty Images)

Rai, reportedly approached this trial court with a plea to remove all objectionable content from social networking sites, like Facebook, Google, YouTube, among others. These points were raised, reportedly when the trial court was hearing Facebook and Google's plea against the order to remove all objectionable content from their sites. Additionally, the reports confirm that the material submitted by Rai as proof against the social networking sites, included "obscene pictures and derogatory articles pertaining to Hindu deities, Prophet Mohammad and Jesus Christ."

For those not in the know, this is an update to an ongoing court case between the government and 21 social networking sites in the country, who have been accused of hosting objectionable content on their sites, including that in the form of text, images, videos, among other things. Rai in this complaint stated that such content was capable of inciting violence in the country, and create rifts between religions. Following this, the court summoned the executives from each of these companies, many of which are based abroad, and alleged that they were guilty under the following sections of the Indian Penal Code - sections 292 (sale of obscene books and material) and 293 (sale of obscene objects to young person).