Trying to prevent a person from uploading objectionable content online is like attempting to prevent a murder, unless it is a case of a repeat offender, like a serial killer, search engine giant Google told the Supreme Court on Monday.
The company was responding to the Supreme Court's repeated query on whether it can set up some a mechanism or a body to identify and prevent those who upload obscene content featuring women and children.
A Bench of Justices Madan B. Lokur and U.U. Lalit was referring to the loss of reputation and dignity of women and children, who become victims of such videos uploaded on websites.
“There is no reasonable way to prevent a person from uploading even before the said content is originated. It is well-nigh impossible. No way to nip it in the bud. Data numbering in billions are uploaded...” senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi submitted for Google.
Noting that every person sitting in this courtroom wants a mechanism to prevent or stop such abusive material from finding its way into the internet, Mr. Singhvi said an intermediary like Google cannot prevent any person uploading from anywhere in the world from “showing his true colours.”
“Murder is impossible to prevent unless there is a pattern in the crime like in the case of serial killers. Yes, we can detect the footprints of a pattern in the case of a repeat offender on the internet like in the case of a serial killer but not otherwise,” Mr. Singhvi conveyed his point.
“As with all crime, the job is to go after the criminal. But to try to strain the intermediary [Google] to bring in a preventive profiling mechanism is impossible,” the senior advocate said.
The government was also asked by the court about the possibility of a preventive mechanism. “Unless I know something has been done, how can I prevent it?” the Centre's counsel and advocate Balasubramanium replied with a question.
When Justice Lalit suggested whether “200 or so words” found objectionable could be blocked, Mr. Singhvi said these words may be used in other perfectly legal contexts on the Internet and these functions would also be unwittingly blocked.
The court is hearing a PIL filed by NGO Prajwala highlighting the increasing number of instances of sexual assault videos of women and children being uploaded on the Internet.
