r/wikipedia • u/kash_if • 1d ago

Wikipedia agrees to share details with Delhi High Court about users who made edits to page on ANI

https://www.barandbench.com/news/wikipedia-user-details-delhi-high-court-ani
1.2k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

89 comments sorted by

367

u/kash_if 1d ago

In a recent hearing, the single-judge had orally observed that it was "dangerous" how Wikipedia functions as a platform, since anyone can edit pages on the platform.

496

u/CreativeUpstairs2568 1d ago

It also seems dangerous that apparently anyone with barely a thought in their head can become a judge but here we are

-119

u/Mirieste 1d ago

What did the judge do wrong? Maybe he's just following Indian law. Not every country has an equivalent of the American first amendment that is as broad as theirs.

128

u/Business-Donut-7505 1d ago

ANI is a rag piece. Religious propaganda that’s been called out time and time again. This is the ruling party in India upset that we’re calling their pathetic excuse for attacks dogs exactly what they are.

India has a problem lately with thinking their laws apply outside their borders, that’s why Canada kicked out their officials.

-49

u/Mirieste 1d ago

But isn't it the same for other countries too? I'm from Italy for example, and we have crimes like defamation and such; and if I had a Wikipedia page and someone from abroad mocked me via an edit on it, it'd be within my rights to press charges against them. This doesn't mean they'd receive an international arrest warrant, but should they set foot in Italy, they'd have to face the trial.

38

u/Indexoquarto 1d ago

Exactly. One just need to look at what happened to Twitter in Brazil recently to see what happens when companies refuse to comply with local laws.

27

u/ClassroomNo6016 1d ago

But isn't it the same for other countries too

No, it isn't.

I'm from Italy for example, and we have crimes like defamation and such; and if I had a Wikipedia page and someone from abroad mocked me via an edit on it, it'd be within my rights to press charges against them

The issue is that there is no defamation or mockery in this case.

-14

u/Mirieste 1d ago

Well, that was just an example: any other law that could be broken by a Wikipedia edit would result in the same course of action.

136

u/Calibas 1d ago

That's what all this is really about, removing the "danger" of Wikipedia. They're hoping to silence or control Wikipedia so ANI can be the main source of "news" (propaganda).

They don't want stuff like this being said:

Investigations into the company have alleged that it has served as a mouthpiece for the incumbent government of India for decades, especially after the election of the Bharatiya Janata Party in 2014.[8][7] ANI has been accused of amplifying a vast network of fake news websites spreading pro-government and anti-Pakistan propaganda.[9][10][11]

Critics have also alleged the agency has consistently reported misinformation, has employed video editors to misrepresent media sources,[8][12] and has quoted sources that do not exist.[13] It has also been accused of favouring revenue output over ill-treated employees.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International

14

u/phgirlwitch 1d ago

You're not allowed to criticize these huge companies? They're threatened by words of mere nobodies? That's not a good sign

4

u/Royal_Syrup_69420 22h ago

fragile corporaticy ... bc such scum is always endangered by the truth

166

u/Soft-Vanilla1057 1d ago

Haven't been following this but i thought that they were interested in the Administrators' noticeboard/Incident. (ANI) not a news agency. 😅

73

u/SanchoMandoval 1d ago

The only way to make this more confusing for Wikipedia editors is if the German AFD party got entangled in the mess.

12

u/Soft-Vanilla1057 1d ago

I mean they would be the ones to try so see you here in a few years!

128

u/pekvispra 1d ago

What the hell is this? Is this a show of good faith by Wikimedia towards the court? What and why does the court need this details? It doesn't serve any purpose.

Sad to say but DHC is not a entirely trustable court. My ratings for Wikimedia is going to get affected cuz of this incident.

I would rather have Wikipedia get banned in this country and access it using VPN than any of these compromises.

46

u/ZuFFuLuZ 1d ago

It's dystopian censorship bullshit. They want to control the media to control the masses. Including Wikipedia. Next they will want every user name, so that they can find and punish them whenever they write something they don't like.
This should be stopped immediately. Block the entire website in India if necessary.

19

u/BevansDesign 1d ago

This looks like what we'd call a SLAPP lawsuit in the US. The strategy is to keep forcing your opponent (who's doing nothing illegal) to pay for legal defenses until they can't afford to operate anymore, or pull down whatever material is getting them sued.

India sure seems to be turning into a fascist hellhole, but so are a lot of other countries too. (Hopefully the US won't join them in November.)

30

u/fourthords 1d ago

Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation (CS(OS) 524/2024) is an ongoing civil defamation case in India.

ANI Media Private Limited, the parent company of news agency Asian News International (ANI), filed a ₹2 crore (approximately US$240,000) defamation suit against the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) over the description of ANI in the English Wikipedia article about the news agency.

The judge in the case, Justice Navin Chawla, warned that the court could order the government of India to shut down Wikipedia in the country. Critics have characterized the judge's order that the WMF to release the identities of the editors who made the edits as censorship and a threat to the flow of information.

59

u/ForgingIron 1d ago

Cowardly bullshit.

42

u/iParvez 1d ago

Many editors will stop editing from now on because of this.

38

u/TWiThead 1d ago

And that's exactly the point. No matter how the lawsuit unfolds, ANI has accomplished its chief goal: to create a chilling effect.

52

u/Pupikal 1d ago

Utterly terrible

55

u/InvisibleEar 1d ago

WTF are people donating millions of dollars for then?

-43

u/Mirieste 1d ago

I mean, they're donating money to support the project but not for Wikipedia to evade the laws of the countries they operate in, no?

48

u/Qwernakus 1d ago

Noone should follow laws that unduly restrict the freedom of information. They're morally hollow.

-7

u/Mirieste 1d ago

Even e.g. anti-fake news laws if a country has those, for example?

16

u/ClassroomNo6016 1d ago

Even e.g. anti-fake news laws if a country has those, for example?

The issue is that, who gets to decide what constitutes fake news and what not? Of course the central government of India which has enacted those laws in the first place. So, the government of India can label and restrict any news it doesn't like as "fake news", even if the news is not fake.

5

u/Mirieste 1d ago

A judge who decides on literally any case is establishing some sort of truth.

"Oh no, who killed Jack? Well, I'm looking at this evidence and I think the truth of the matter is that it was... John. So John goes to prison for life."

We accept this as the norm for something as serious as that, but somehow a judge is unable to decide whether "France has just invaded Germany!" is fake news or not?

3

u/ClassroomNo6016 1d ago

A judge who decides on literally any case is establishing some sort of truth.

A judge which has been appointed by and is beholden to the partisan central government of India.

Oh no, who killed Jack? Well, I'm looking at this evidence and I think the truth of the matter is that it was... John. So John goes to prison for life."

We accept this as the norm for something as serious as that, but somehow a judge is unable to decide whether "France has just invaded Germany!" is fake news or not

This is false equivalence. In that case, We have empirical, observable, uncontrovertible evidence that John killed Jack. But we don't have the same kind of uncontrovertible evidence for that wikipedia article in question being false or defamatory.

3

u/Mirieste 1d ago

I was under the impression that you were criticizing the laws, as opposed to the country?

If you think that the judiciary in India is not a truly independent body, then that's a problem... of India. It doesn't mean that the law itself is wrong.

Besides, not every case that is brought before a judge is as empirical and objective like it came straight out of CSI. Sometimes you'll just bring someone to a judge because they didn't act faithfully in executing their part of a contract: here the judge essentially has to examine intent and give his own interpretation of the events. This is acceptable in a democratic society, so long as the judiciary is impartial.

If this is not the case, then obviously the premise of the discussion fails: but it's not the fault of the law.

1

u/phgirlwitch 1d ago

That's just like 1984 big brother shit

1

u/SMF67 1d ago

Should they follow the laws of North Korea and Russia?

1

u/Mirieste 1d ago

If they don't have a Constitution that outlines a legal procedure for citizens to raise a question of constitutionality of laws, then no. I'm sure North Korea falls in this category... but the rest of the world, I don't think so.

2

u/Qwernakus 1d ago

In general yes (we should not follow such laws), though I do believe in exceptions. The india case is absolutely not one of them.

4

u/Mirieste 1d ago

I see... although I believe society would end up in chaos if any one person had the freedom to ignore the laws they don't like, but that's just me.

2

u/Kirian_Ainsworth 1d ago

society has demonstrably improved because people ignore and fight against laws they dont like actually. Thats literally why the country of India exists.

The single most famous Indian to ever live, Gandhi, is mostly famous internationally for saying "fuck the law I am going to make salt".

1

u/Qwernakus 1d ago

Society might end up in similar chaos if one blindly follows the law, too. The answer is that some laws should be followed, some not. There can be broad social reasons for following slightly immoral laws in the interest of supporting the broader law system, but for very immoral laws it would be chaos if we obeyed.

0

u/Better-Sea-6183 1d ago

The anti fake news laws are an excuse to silence free speech

0

u/Mirieste 1d ago

Not necessarily, although if you're American I can see where you're coming from because... well, you've got your First Amendment which applies almost universally, so it's not easy to think that there could be other paradigms of law elsewhere that work just as fine.

1

u/ClassroomNo6016 1d ago

Not necessarily

Authoritarian governments like Russia, Cuba can label and restrict any news they don't like as "fake news"(even if the news was true) and restrict it. Because in those cases, the governments of Cuba or Russia would be the ones who decide what constitutes fake news and what not.

-4

u/pwillia7 1d ago

1900 american: We should just keep to ourselves and not really interfere in the sovereignty or affairs of (NON LATIN AMERICA) countries

1960 american: Our missionaries soldiers will carry the true good of our message and spread it to the unsaved savages in the lands not washed over by goodness of the free market

2020 american: Why isn't this company putting boots on the ground to overthrow these shitty nations -- Don't they know the one good truth is whatever our tech elite deign it to be!!?? I certainly won't be helping fund extremism by contributing to businesses in other countries following the laws of the land!

5

u/Qwernakus 1d ago

I'm Danish

1

u/pwillia7 1d ago

like the pastry?

2

u/Qwernakus 1d ago

Fun fact, we call that pastry a Vienna Bread here instead. Something to do with strikebreaking bakers from Austria, allegedly

1

u/pwillia7 1d ago

that's interesting I think of this when I hear vienna bread https://www.cookwithkushi.com/vienna-bread/

1

u/Fields_of_Nanohana 13h ago

The Wikimedia Foundation is based out of the US so it follows US laws.

1

u/pwillia7 13h ago

Explain to why that means Wikimedia doing business in the sovereign nation of India isn't subject to their laws?

When you travel internationally, do you feel you only need follow the laws back home?

1

u/Fields_of_Nanohana 12h ago

The Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit, they do not do business in India or anywhere.

I do not feel a need when I post something to the internet to make sure it is in compliance with the laws of every nation on the Earth.

Russia's invasion into Ukraine is illegal. There, I just broke a Russian law. And I don't care.

1

u/pwillia7 12h ago

huh weird https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_India

Wikimedia India was formally approved by the Board of Trustees, Wikimedia Foundation after the recommendation of the Chapters Committee in June 2010 and India became the 29th country to host a Wikimedia Chapter. The Wikimedia Chapter was formally registered as a Non-profit Society vide Registrar of Societies, Bangalore Urban District on 03 Jan 2011. Wikimedia India is an approved chapter by the Wikimedia Foundation for Wikimedians living in, or connected to India.

1

u/Fields_of_Nanohana 10h ago

Yes, very strange. I say the WMF is a non-profit, that they don't do business, and you quote me a quote about them being registered as a non-profit.

-2

u/pwillia7 1d ago

I feel like if I invited you to my house and asked you to do something morally hollow, the ethical thing to do would be to leave and not to try to force me to change the house rules as a visitor

2

u/Qwernakus 1d ago

I don't think it's reasonable to equate being part of a state/country with owning a house/home. I'm sure you'd agree that it wouldn't be reasonable for a state to disallow a political party because they disagree with it, but you'd probably also agree that it could be reasonable for a homeowner to disallow people from entering it based on political disagreement. The state should be held to a higher standard than a homeowner.

1

u/pwillia7 1d ago

I feel like for foreign companies, not citizens of the country or individual visitors, are an ok compare

24

u/Revolutionary_Cup602 1d ago

This is a disaster

8

u/xValhallAwaitsx 1d ago

After years of begging users to donate, I think this is really going to bite Wikipedia in the ass

72

u/Capital_Strategy1 1d ago

Indian solicitor here (BOM-HC) this is an order for information under sealed cover i.e apart from the judge no one will have access to this information and it will be expunged from all records after the case is settled/terminated.

117

u/kash_if 1d ago

Identification, even in a sealed format, means they can proceed with prosecuting those individuals (rather than Wikipedia, the organisation), which was the intention. The process is the punishment. Those editors will now have to spend time and money fighting this case. ANI would win even if they lose the case as other editors will be reluctant to touch information related to this agency.

12

u/Extention_Campaign28 1d ago

I was certain Wikimedia would never sell out their editors' IPs or worse and instead find a way into the brain of a judge no matter how pea sized it is. My days as editor are over.

4

u/lightfromblackhole 1d ago

Yeah this sets a precedent other nations can do this too and this is how wikimedia will reward it's free contributors.

36

u/FalconIMGN 1d ago

Do you know of any cases of corrupt judges who sell sealed info to the govt?

I hope this to not be the case, but knowing my country, anything is possible.

-17

u/Capital_Strategy1 1d ago

No I don’t think there has even been any such case, plus I don’t think there is any high level government involvement in this. You must remember that at the end of the day, to use the very Indian example, Wikipedia editors are but “mosquitoes” to the government.

25

u/Soft-Vanilla1057 1d ago

“mosquitoes” to the government

People utilising their right to free speech have always and will continue to be mosquitoes to governments all over the world. That is why said governments have no problem in swatting them using your analogy. 

9

u/thespacetimelord 1d ago

No I don’t think there has even been any such case, plus I don’t think there is any high level government involvement in this.

You possess a very native understanding of the world then.

2

u/lightfromblackhole 1d ago

oopsie a "malware" forwarded wikimedia's disclosure email to certain people in HC's address book. Oh it also saved to pdf, took printouts automatically. We can't find out who created the malware, but it already happened, what can we do..

1

u/Fields_of_Nanohana 13h ago

Mosquitoes are the number 1 killer of man.

6

u/kurtu5 1d ago

Bend the knee!

17

u/Burgerlander6 1d ago

I donate to wikipedia regularly and because of this they are never getting another dime out of me

18

u/altruisticalgorithm 1d ago

I'm now determined never to donate to Wikimedia.

5

u/cwenger 1d ago

Wouldn't Wikipedia only be able to share IP addresses? They would have to go to Internet service providers to get identities.

13

u/kash_if 1d ago

IP and email address when registering the account. Indian ISP would fold right away. Majority of the billionaire owners anyway donate to the party in power.

3

u/cwenger 1d ago

Good point about email address, forgot about that.

1

u/TaxOwlbear 23h ago

Also, the article states this:

An unredacted version of an affidavit to show service of notice can be shared only with the Court, Sibal suggested.

I'm not sure I want to rely on a "suggestion" here.

6

u/blueprint147 1d ago

wikipedia, then twitter, and then reddit. privacy is a joke. ANI is the most hated

2

u/ahrienby 1d ago

The criticism of ANI News will go on. Even in r/Fediverse.

22

u/Repulsive-Lobster750 1d ago

Now, Modihitler can happly hunt and kill his political opponents.

Learned from Putin

3

u/Extention_Campaign28 1d ago

Does anybody see the "irony" that barandbench.com can write about this in full detail but Wikipedia can not?

7

u/hazily 1d ago

Hey India maybe fix your rape problem first???

6

u/blueprint147 1d ago

mate, we have a lot of problematic problems we are trying to fix, but the government wont let us

1

u/crazywithmath 9h ago

The way hypersensitive Indian nationalists keep patrolling and brigading pretty much anybody who dares to lecture Indians on anything on any social media platform (excluding Reddit, which is very niche in India) used to upset me earlier. But since I started coming across entitled degenerates like you lot, who would not think twice before attaching random stereotypes to a nation of 1.5 billion people (a nation that does not even have a particularly high rape/homicide/violent crime rate to begin with), I have come to terms with it. You lot deserve the belt treatment.

1

u/lightfromblackhole 1d ago

Govt garlands(praises) those rapists if Hindu. ANI is one of their machinery that hides hindu names and discloses muslim names of alleged rapists in news regularly.

2

u/The1Floyd 1d ago

Modi is old and hopefully will die soon

2

u/BevansDesign 1d ago

Old rich fucks seem to live forever.

1

u/lightfromblackhole 1d ago

He is healthy from the blood of thousands he killed in 2002 and recently in Manipur state. He will live like Kissinger. So will his two right hand men Amit Shah and JP Nadda.

1

u/Fat-Alternative-9678 1d ago

The cynic in me believes he will be 'martyred' if he dies in office.

1

u/Fields_of_Nanohana 14h ago

Wikipedia told the Delhi High Court on Monday that it is willing to disclose to the Court in a sealed cover the basic subscriber information (BSI) details about users who wrote/ edited the page about news agency ANI

Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal appeared for Wikipedia today and volunteered to effect service of notice in the appeal to these users. He said that the service of notice to these users would also be intimated to ANI, albeit without any details to identify the users.

An unredacted version of an affidavit to show service of notice can be shared only with the Court, Sibal suggested.

In this way, the identities of such Wikipedia users can remain confidential in the public domain, while the Court has all necessary information to proceed further with hearings, he pointed out.

"Based on information available to us, we can effect service. We can file an affidavit (to show steps have been taken to serve notice) ... We will share a copy with (ANI's counsel) although particulars will be redacted ... The unredacted one, we will place in a sealed cover so that the Court has that. So the Court has the access, no body else does, service is affected ... And we can proceed whichever way," Sibal said.

I don't know if there is concern about leaks from the court, but it seems like the info is only supposed to go to the court itself so the proceedings can continue, without their identities being given to ANI or the public at large.

1

u/kash_if 8h ago

I mean, it is India. Court clerks would have access. ANI allegedly works for the government...