Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/licence-permit-web-12673/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/licence-permit-web-12673/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/licence-permit-web-12673/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/licence-permit-web-12673/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Licence-permit web&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;licence-permit-web-12673&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12673,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;internet,media,Law and Justice&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Business Standard


&amp;nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Licence-permit web&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;licence-permit-web-12673&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12673,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 12553
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;internet,media,Law and Justice&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Business Standard


&amp;nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;p&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/licence-permit-web-12673.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Business Standard


&nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Licence-permit web</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <p>-The Business Standard</p><p>&nbsp;</p><div align="justify">The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &ldquo;communal riots across the country&rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.<br /><br />First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&rdquo; In fact, as the People&rsquo;s Republic of China&rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&rsquo;s two most populous nations.<br /><br />Mr Rai&rsquo;s &ldquo;judgement&rdquo;, and by extension the government&rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &mdash; what is &ldquo;offensive&rdquo;, &ldquo;insulting&rdquo; and &ldquo;blasphemous&rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &ldquo;offended&rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.<br />&nbsp; &nbsp;<br /><em>CORRECTION <br /></em><br />Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted<br /><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Licence-permit web&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;licence-permit-web-12673&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12673,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;internet,media,Law and Justice&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Business Standard


&amp;nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Licence-permit web&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;licence-permit-web-12673&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12673,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 12553
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;internet,media,Law and Justice&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Business Standard


&amp;nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;p&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/licence-permit-web-12673.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Business Standard


&nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Licence-permit web</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <p>-The Business Standard</p><p>&nbsp;</p><div align="justify">The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &ldquo;communal riots across the country&rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.<br /><br />First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&rdquo; In fact, as the People&rsquo;s Republic of China&rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&rsquo;s two most populous nations.<br /><br />Mr Rai&rsquo;s &ldquo;judgement&rdquo;, and by extension the government&rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &mdash; what is &ldquo;offensive&rdquo;, &ldquo;insulting&rdquo; and &ldquo;blasphemous&rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &ldquo;offended&rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.<br />&nbsp; &nbsp;<br /><em>CORRECTION <br /></em><br />Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted<br /><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67ec271b19e53-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Licence-permit web&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;licence-permit-web-12673&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12673,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;internet,media,Law and Justice&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;
-The Business Standard


&amp;nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 12553,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Licence-permit web&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;p&gt;
-The Business Standard
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;licence-permit-web-12673&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 12673,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 12553
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;internet,media,Law and Justice&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;
-The Business Standard


&amp;nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;p&gt;-The Business Standard&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &amp;ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&amp;rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &amp;ldquo;communal riots across the country&amp;rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&amp;rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &amp;mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &amp;ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&amp;rdquo; In fact, as the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China&amp;rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&amp;rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&amp;rsquo;s two most populous nations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Mr Rai&amp;rsquo;s &amp;ldquo;judgement&amp;rdquo;, and by extension the government&amp;rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&amp;rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &amp;mdash; what is &amp;ldquo;offensive&amp;rdquo;, &amp;ldquo;insulting&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;blasphemous&amp;rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &amp;ldquo;offended&amp;rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&amp;rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&amp;rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;em&gt;CORRECTION &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/licence-permit-web-12673.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="
-The Business Standard


&nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Licence-permit web</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <p>-The Business Standard</p><p>&nbsp;</p><div align="justify">The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &ldquo;communal riots across the country&rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.<br /><br />First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&rdquo; In fact, as the People&rsquo;s Republic of China&rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&rsquo;s two most populous nations.<br /><br />Mr Rai&rsquo;s &ldquo;judgement&rdquo;, and by extension the government&rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &mdash; what is &ldquo;offensive&rdquo;, &ldquo;insulting&rdquo; and &ldquo;blasphemous&rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &ldquo;offended&rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.<br />&nbsp; &nbsp;<br /><em>CORRECTION <br /></em><br />Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted<br /><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 12553,
		'title' => 'Licence-permit web',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<p>
-The Business Standard
</p>
<p>
&nbsp;
</p>
<div align="justify">
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &ldquo;communal riots across the country&rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.<br />
<br />
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&rdquo; In fact, as the People&rsquo;s Republic of China&rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&rsquo;s two most populous nations.<br />
<br />
Mr Rai&rsquo;s &ldquo;judgement&rdquo;, and by extension the government&rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &mdash; what is &ldquo;offensive&rdquo;, &ldquo;insulting&rdquo; and &ldquo;blasphemous&rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &ldquo;offended&rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.<br />
&nbsp; &nbsp;<br />
<em>CORRECTION <br />
</em><br />
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted<br />
<br />
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'licence-permit-web-12673',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 12673,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 12553,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web',
	'metaKeywords' => 'internet,media,Law and Justice',
	'metaDesc' => '
-The Business Standard


&nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...',
	'disp' => '<p>-The Business Standard</p><p>&nbsp;</p><div align="justify">The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &ldquo;communal riots across the country&rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.<br /><br />First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&rdquo; In fact, as the People&rsquo;s Republic of China&rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&rsquo;s two most populous nations.<br /><br />Mr Rai&rsquo;s &ldquo;judgement&rdquo;, and by extension the government&rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &mdash; what is &ldquo;offensive&rdquo;, &ldquo;insulting&rdquo; and &ldquo;blasphemous&rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &ldquo;offended&rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.<br />&nbsp; &nbsp;<br /><em>CORRECTION <br /></em><br />Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted<br /><br /></div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 12553,
	'title' => 'Licence-permit web',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<p>
-The Business Standard
</p>
<p>
&nbsp;
</p>
<div align="justify">
The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &ldquo;communal riots across the country&rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.<br />
<br />
First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&rdquo; In fact, as the People&rsquo;s Republic of China&rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&rsquo;s two most populous nations.<br />
<br />
Mr Rai&rsquo;s &ldquo;judgement&rdquo;, and by extension the government&rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &mdash; what is &ldquo;offensive&rdquo;, &ldquo;insulting&rdquo; and &ldquo;blasphemous&rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &ldquo;offended&rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.<br />
&nbsp; &nbsp;<br />
<em>CORRECTION <br />
</em><br />
Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted<br />
<br />
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Business Standard, 20 January, 2012, http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/licence-permit-web/462323/',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'licence-permit-web-12673',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 12673,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {},
		(int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 12553
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Licence-permit web'
$metaKeywords = 'internet,media,Law and Justice'
$metaDesc = '
-The Business Standard


&nbsp;


The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government...'
$disp = '<p>-The Business Standard</p><p>&nbsp;</p><div align="justify">The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for &ldquo;promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class&rdquo; under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause &ldquo;communal riots across the country&rdquo;. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites&rsquo; prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive.<br /><br />First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible &mdash; even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: &ldquo;Like China, we too can block such websites.&rdquo; In fact, as the People&rsquo;s Republic of China&rsquo;s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India&rsquo;s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world&rsquo;s two most populous nations.<br /><br />Mr Rai&rsquo;s &ldquo;judgement&rdquo;, and by extension the government&rsquo;s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India&rsquo;s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective &mdash; what is &ldquo;offensive&rdquo;, &ldquo;insulting&rdquo; and &ldquo;blasphemous&rdquo;? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be &ldquo;offended&rdquo; by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People&rsquo;s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India&rsquo;s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.<br />&nbsp; &nbsp;<br /><em>CORRECTION <br /></em><br />Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted<br /><br /></div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Licence-permit web

-The Business Standard   The same week that Wikipedia and several other highly trafficked websites went dark to protest legislation in the United States that would severely curtail their operations, the Delhi High Court was hearing an attempt by the Indian government to take on 21 social networking sites (owned by 10 overseas companies) for “promoting enmity between classes, causing prejudice to national integration and insulting religion or religious belief of any class” under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). This follows the attempt by Vinay Rai, a journalist based in the National Capital Region, to put together a list of online content created by users of these websites which, in his opinion, could cause “communal riots across the country”. The government concurred, and recently sanctioned the sites’ prosecution, part of a response by the authorities that has been far from impressive. First, Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading, something that is manifestly impossible — even for China, with its Great Firewall and an army of government censors working overtime. Perhaps not fully informed of that failure, Justice Suresh Kait of the Delhi High Court remarked: “Like China, we too can block such websites.” In fact, as the People’s Republic of China’s failure to do so shows, it is a technologically daunting task; indeed, it is not feasible unless all international phone calls are cut off, as was done by the Egyptian and Iranian governments in extremis. Even attempting it would be a colossal waste of time and public resources. Apart from crippling India’s 100 million-plus net users, such an attempted ban would lead to justified comparisons of the fundamental freedoms, such as the right to free speech, granted to their respective citizens by the world’s two most populous nations. Mr Rai’s “judgement”, and by extension the government’s in sanctioning prosecution on the grounds that content could trigger disharmony, damage national integration, etc, seems flawed for a simple reason: the efflux of time. The cited content has been freely available for over a year. It did not spark riots, nor did it even elicit any comment, adverse or otherwise, until the authorities chose to make an issue of it. In spite of its tradition of liberal democracy, India’s legal legacy, as embodied in the IPC of 1861, severely limits free speech. The verbiage used in these laws is highly subjective — what is “offensive”, “insulting” and “blasphemous”? Between January and June 2011, various government agencies asked Google (which also owns Orkut, Blogger and YouTube) to remove 358 items, and to furnish the details of over 1,700 users. Other service providers have received similar demands. The recent creation of a new body of laws which allows private individuals to be “offended” by Web content squeezes speech further. A spate of complaints could clog an already stressed judicial system. Clearly, liberal democracies should not even be trying to emulate a form of control that the People’s Republic of China has failed to pull off. India’s government would be sensible to note that its surfers seem to possess enough in the way of good sense to ignore supposedly inflammatory content.     CORRECTION Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal has clarified that, he had not asked that social networking sites pre-screen content before uploading. The error is regretted