Vista Mind, the coaching institute which had threatened a Kolkata student with legal consequences for posting a what they termed a defamatory review of the company on the PaGaLGuY forums, today issued a clarification in which they insisted that it wasn't the overall post they objected to, but only the parts where they had be...
12
3
59 Comments
Apurv
@viveknest - I don't think our story would have changed h....
20 Apr.
sujitpatel1989
Good GD both of you @Apurv and @viveknest . Learnt a lot,....
20 Apr.
There is plenty of stuff users say on PG that other entities or b-schools don't have a problem with. A large number of them like to participate in the discussions to present their side of the story. Across the world, the best known companies now invest in a social media plan for such things, and that does not involve legal notices. Business schools teach electives on social media damage control, and that does not involve legal notices. Are they all fools? So if you are trying to tell me that it is only natural to take the legal recourse, I have to say that it is the rarest of rare things to see a company want to sue its costumer. Even then we acknowledge that not all companies subscribe to this, but we still need them to tell us that they don't. I already have written a lot of this stuff in the article/comments previously and I feel that I am now only repeating myself, and others are not even reading it. I have nothing new to add to this discussion. PS: Section 66A alone is not draconian. Defamation in the Internet context is draconian too. Read about Eye eye pee emm's URL blocking case two months ago for more info.
