Feeds

Microsoft cleared in web filth court battle, wins $100 compo

Ruled not a social network - in your face Yahoo!

The essential guide to IT transformation

Microsoft has been cleared of wrongdoing in a high-profile court case alleging it and scores of other web companies hosted “objectionable content” - and even managed to get the plaintiff fined by the judge.

The case, which was brought by Fatwa-Online founder Mufti Aijas Arshad Quasmi, is being heard in New Delhi, India.

Quasmi alleged that social networking companies including Google, Facebook and others are wantonly harbouring socially, religiously and politically offensive material that will do nothing but corrupt the moral integrity of the country.

However, displaying an uncanny grasp of technology matters, the judge dropped Microsoft from the case after deciding it was the “odd man out” and definitely not a social network, according to a Times of India report.

"I am unable to understand how could Microsoft India be included in a bracket which lists social networking websites. It is a company engaged in development and sale of softwares and computing solutions etc,” civil judge Parveen Singh said.

"It is not a website which provides a platform to the people where they can interact with each other and post or publish their views on various issues or subjects.”

Singh ordered Quasmi to compensate Microsoft to the tune of 5,000 rupees (£64, $101) as a result.

Microsoft has, of course, dabbled with this social Web 2.0 malarky, launching its so.cl networking platform for students last year, although that’s not available in India as yet.

The decision could give Yahoo! some hope in its battle to similarly be dropped from the case. The web firm filed a strongly worded complaint last week arguing it had been a victim of “an abuse of the process of law”.

It will find out on 5 March whether it was successful, although given that Yahoo! has spent many years trying to make its services more social and personal, spending millions of marketing dollars in the process, it may struggle to persuade the judge that it is not a social network.

Facebook, meanwhile, has claimed it isn’t responsible for user-generated content on its site, while Google has 'fessed up and removed any offending content. ®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
GCHQ protesters stick it to British spooks ... by drinking urine
Activists told NOT to snap pics of staff at the concrete doughnut
Britain's housing crisis: What are we going to do about it?
Rent control: Better than bombs at destroying housing
Top beak: UK privacy law may be reconsidered because of social media
Rise of Twitter etc creates 'enormous challenges'
What do you mean, I have to POST a PHYSICAL CHEQUE to get my gun licence?
Stop bitching about firearms fees - we need computerisation
Ex US cybersecurity czar guilty in child sex abuse website case
Health and Human Services IT security chief headed online to share vile images
We need less U.S. in our WWW – Euro digital chief Steelie Neelie
EC moves to shift status quo at Internet Governance Forum
Oz biz regulator discovers shared servers in EPIC FACEPALM
'Not aware' that one IP can hold more than one Website
prev story

Whitepapers

Endpoint data privacy in the cloud is easier than you think
Innovations in encryption and storage resolve issues of data privacy and key requirements for companies to look for in a solution.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Advanced data protection for your virtualized environments
Find a natural fit for optimizing protection for the often resource-constrained data protection process found in virtual environments.
Boost IT visibility and business value
How building a great service catalog relieves pressure points and demonstrates the value of IT service management.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.