5 ms·

I feel scared for him. He has been constantly exposing more of this shitty company on reddit (r/india) WhiteHatJr's ads are complete BS. They advertise that a

by ffpip 6y ago

I feel scared for him. He has been constantly exposing more of this shitty company on reddit (r/india) WhiteHatJr's ads are complete BS. They advertise that a 9 year old kid (wolf gupta, yes that is apparently his real name) got a job at Google

sokoloff 6y ago
It seems odd for a company to publicly accuse Google of exploiting 9-year-olds in India in their advertising.
- villgax 6y ago
  They made it out to make believe that kid got a job at google, somehow.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    I understand. That’s isomorphic with accusing Google of employing a 9-year-old, which might suggest a path to investigate with the aim of getting Google to issue an admittance or a categorical denial of this outlandish claim.
    - mealkh 6y ago
      I am a fan of this approach. One should get Google involved, they would probably make very clear that it's all made-up.
      - whiteHatForWhat 6y ago
        Yup, that sounds solid?
ankit219 6y ago
It's gonna get worse. Criminal Defamation laws in India put the onus on the defendant (Poonia, dont know legal terms) to show that he did not defame the company, or to show that he did it in interest of public good. They are skewed towards the company or the person alleging defamation. In other countries its the person alleging that needs to prove that he was defamed unfairly.
- boruto 6y ago
  > Criminal Defamation laws in India put the onus on the defendant. Afaik this is incorrect. Could you please give a source. I just read a tweet by anirudhha malapani too that the onus is on whitehat.
  - ankit219 6y ago
    There are various cases where the onus is on book writer or publisher to show the intent was good faith and not defamation. Look at the case of The Wire v Arnab Goswami a couple of years back, or even the current Priya Ramani case. This is not a well known fact and thats what makes life difficult in India. > Going through the provisions of Section 499, it is clear that the accused has to not only prove that his/her statement is true but also made in the ‘public interest’, a phrase that is as vague as they come. [1] https://www.thebetterindia.com/162334/criminal-defamation-india-news/ https://www.thebetterindia.com/162334/criminal-defamation-in... One mistake I made when i wrote this was that I wasnt aware if this is a Civil Defamation or a Criminal defamation. Frankly, I dont know the difference even now, just that these two exist as a sheer legacy of British laws and govt never moved to correct them.
johnx123-up 6y ago
As I mentioned in another thread, these EdTech companies from India seem to have a nexus with Google. My friend tells me that Google India is very aggressive on advertising and for a decent budget they'll bend any policies.
- vkaku 6y ago
  Look at Sequoia Capital India. One of their partners used to head Microsoft India and Google India before. Coincidence?
mandeepj 6y ago
> a 9 year old kid (wolf gupta, yes that is apparently his real name) got a job at Google Is n’t 18 the legal age to be employed in the corporate world?

by ffpip 6y ago

sokoloff 6y ago

It seems odd for a company to publicly accuse Google of exploiting 9-year-olds in India in their advertising.

villgax 6y ago
They made it out to make believe that kid got a job at google, somehow.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  I understand. That’s isomorphic with accusing Google of employing a 9-year-old, which might suggest a path to investigate with the aim of getting Google to issue an admittance or a categorical denial of this outlandish claim.
  - mealkh 6y ago
    I am a fan of this approach. One should get Google involved, they would probably make very clear that it's all made-up.
    - whiteHatForWhat 6y ago
      Yup, that sounds solid?

ankit219 6y ago

It's gonna get worse. Criminal Defamation laws in India put the onus on the defendant (Poonia, dont know legal terms) to show that he did not defame the company, or to show that he did it in interest of public good. They are skewed towards the company or the person alleging defamation. In other countries its the person alleging that needs to prove that he was defamed unfairly.

boruto 6y ago
> Criminal Defamation laws in India put the onus on the defendant. Afaik this is incorrect. Could you please give a source. I just read a tweet by anirudhha malapani too that the onus is on whitehat.
- ankit219 6y ago
  There are various cases where the onus is on book writer or publisher to show the intent was good faith and not defamation. Look at the case of The Wire v Arnab Goswami a couple of years back, or even the current Priya Ramani case. This is not a well known fact and thats what makes life difficult in India. > Going through the provisions of Section 499, it is clear that the accused has to not only prove that his/her statement is true but also made in the ‘public interest’, a phrase that is as vague as they come. [1] https://www.thebetterindia.com/162334/criminal-defamation-india-news/ https://www.thebetterindia.com/162334/criminal-defamation-in... One mistake I made when i wrote this was that I wasnt aware if this is a Civil Defamation or a Criminal defamation. Frankly, I dont know the difference even now, just that these two exist as a sheer legacy of British laws and govt never moved to correct them.

johnx123-up 6y ago

As I mentioned in another thread, these EdTech companies from India seem to have a nexus with Google. My friend tells me that Google India is very aggressive on advertising and for a decent budget they'll bend any policies.

vkaku 6y ago
Look at Sequoia Capital India. One of their partners used to head Microsoft India and Google India before. Coincidence?

mandeepj 6y ago

> a 9 year old kid (wolf gupta, yes that is apparently his real name) got a job at Google Is n’t 18 the legal age to be employed in the corporate world?