"An English channel was launched in India, it was airing content from the US since it didn't initially have local content. Given the expanded free speech and expression in the US, the license for comedy is much more there than for certain people, and certainly for two judges [in India]. For them, it bordered on vulgarity, and the channel got a ban order from a single judge, and also from the division bench. But once it went to the Supreme Court, we thankfully had a judge who had more liberal standards," said Abhishek Malhotra, Managing Partner at TMT Law. He was speaking at MediaNama's discussion on Regulation of Online Content last week in New Delhi, supported by Amazon, Netflix and Facebook, and in partnership with CCG-NLU Delhi. Malhotra was referring to the Delhi High Court's ban on Comedy Central, which the Supreme Court later stayed. His point was that it's antithetical to have standardisation in content, since content is creative. "We would become robots if we have standardisation", he said, adding that it's "very difficult" to follow and implement standardisation, when you can instead have broad regulation. [caption id="attachment_205931" align="aligncenter" width="1200"] Abhishek Malhotra, Managing Partner, TMT Law[/caption] But standardising age ratings is a good way to ensure a broad framework for maturity rating for content, according to Ambika Khurana, Director, Public Policy at Netflix. "Strengthening parental controls are important and should be used. Tech companies do provide the tools, but usage varies across countries and isn't determined by how educated…
