document_title: Child safety seat

question_text: when was the first child car seat made

question_tokens: when was the first child car seat made

text: Child safety seat

text: History[edit]

text: Since the first car was manufactured and put on the market in the early 1900s, many modifications and adjustments have been implemented to protect those that drive and ride in motorized vehicles. Most restraints were put into place to protect adults without regard for young children. Though child seats were beginning to be manufactured in the early 1930s, their purpose was not the safety of children. The purpose was to act as booster seats to bring the child to a height easier for the driving parent to see them. It was not until 1962 that two designs with the purpose of protecting a child were developed independently.[5] British inventor Jean Ames created a rear-facing child seat with a Y-shaped strap similar to today's models.[6] American Leonard Rivkin, of Denver Colorado, designed a forward-facing seat with a metal frame to protect the child.[7] It is noted that seat belts for adults were not standard equipment in automobiles until the 1960s.

text: Classifications[edit]

text: There are several types of car seats, which vary in the position of the child and size of the seat. The United Nations standard ECE R44/04[8] categorizes these into 4 groups: 0-3. Many car seats combine the larger groups 1, 2 and 3. Some new car models includes stock restraint seats by default.

text: Group 0[edit]

text: Group 0 baby seats, or infant carriers, keep the baby locked up in a rear-facing position and are secured in place by a standard adult seat belt and/or an ISOFIX fitting.

text: Group 0 carrycots hold the baby lying on its back.

text: Carrycots are secured by both seat belts in the rear seat of the car. Both types have handles to allow them to be easily moved into and out of the car.

text:
Position: Laying (in carrycots), rear-facing (in infant carriers), no airbags (with the exception of curtain airbags).
Recommended weight: Birth to 10 kg (22 lb)
Approximate age: Birth to 15 month

text:
Car Seat - Middle Back Seat

Car Seat - Not in Front Seat

text: Fastened carrycots[edit]

text: Carrycots or infant car beds are used for children that cannot sit in a regular baby seat, such as premature infants or infants that suffer from apnea. A carrycot is a restraint system intended to accommodate and restrain the child in a supine or prone position with the child's spine perpendicular to the median longitudinal plane of the vehicle. Carrycots are designed to distribute the restraining forces over the child's head and body, excluding its limbs, in the event of a big crash. It must be put on the rear seat of the car. Some models can be changed to face forward after the baby has reached the weight limit which is normally about 15-20 kilograms.

text: Carrycots generally include a stomach belt and a connection to the (three points) safety belt.

text: This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (May 2008)

text: Infant carriers[edit]

text: 'Infant carrier' means a restraint system intended to accommodate the child in a rearward-facing semi-recumbent position. This design distributes the restraining forces over the child's head and body, excluding its limbs, in the event of the frontal collision.

text: For young infants, the seat used is an infant carrier with typical weight recommendations of 5-20 lb. Most infant seats made in the US can now be used up to at least 22 pounds (10.0 kg) and 29 inches (74 cm), with some going up to 35 pounds (16 kg). In the past, most infant seats in the US went to 20 pounds (9.1 kg) and 26 inches (66 cm). Infant carriers are often also called "Bucket Seats" as they resemble a bucket with a handle. Some (but not all) seats can be used with the base secured, or with the carrier strapped in alone. Some seats do not have bases. Infant carriers are mounted rear-facing and are designed to "cocoon" against the back of the vehicle seat in the event of a collision, with the impact being absorbed in the outer shell of the restraint. Rear-facing seats are deemed the safest, and in the US children must remain in this position until they are at least 1 year of age and at least 20 pounds (9.1 kg). although it is recommended to keep them rear-facing until at least 2 years old or until they outgrow the rear-facing car seat height and weight, whichever is longer.

text: Group 0+[edit]

text: Group 0+ car seats commonly have a chassis permanently fixed into the car by an adult seat belt and can be placed into some form of baby transport using the integral handle if it is the specific model. Rear-facing child seats are inherently safer than forward-facing child seats because they provide more support for the child's head in the event of a sudden deceleration. Although some parents are eager to switch to a forward-facing child seat because it seems more "grown up," various countries and car seat manufacturers recommend that children continue to use a rear-facing child seat for as long as physically possible[9]

text:
Position: Sitting, rear-facing, no airbag(with the exception of curtain airbags).
Recommended weight: Birth (2–3 kg) to 13 kg (29 lb).
Approximate age: Birth to 15 months

text: Convertible seats[edit]

text: Convertible seats can be used throughout many stages. Many convertible seats will transition from a rear-facing seat, to a forward-facing seat, and some then can be used as a booster seat. Many convertible seats allow for 2.3–18 kg (5-40 lb.) rear-facing, allowing children to be in the safer rear-facing position up to a weight of 18 kg (40 lbs).

text: Convertible safety seats can be installed as either rear-facing or forward-facing. There is a large selection available to choose from and weight limits, height limits, and extra features vary from seat to seat and by manufacturer. Seats with a 5-point harness are considered safer than those with an overhead shield[10]

text: Convertibles aren't considered the best choice for a newborn because the bottom harness slots are often above the shoulders of most newborns. A seat with low bottom harness slots can be used if it is desired to use a convertible from birth.

text: Rear-facing weight limits range from 20 to 50 lb (9.1 to 22.7 kg) depending on the manufacturer and country of origin. Forward-facing limits range from 20 to 90 lb (9.1 to 40.8 kg) depending on the seat model and the manufacturer and country of origin.

text: Most convertible seats in the U.S. have at least a 35 pounds (16 kg) rear-facing weight limit, most now to go to 40 pounds (18 kg), some 45 pounds (20 kg) and a few 50 pounds (23 kg). The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends that children remain rear-facing until they outgrow their convertible seat, regardless of how old they are. Children can remain in a rear-facing seat until they have either outgrown the weight limit for their seat, or the top of their head is within 1 inch (25 mm) of the top of the shell of the car seat.[11]

text: Group 1[edit]

text: A permanent fixture in the car using an adult seat belt to hold it in place and a five-point baby harness to hold the infant.

text:
Position: Sitting, recommended rear-facing but forward-facing is legal, no airbag (with the exception of curtain airbags).
Recommended weight: 9 to 18 kg (20 to 40 lb)
Approximate age: 9 months to 4 years (Although older children can fit too sometimes)

text: It is recommended that children sit rear-facing for as long as possible. In Scandinavian countries, for example, children sit rear-facing until around 4 years old. Rear-facing car seats are significantly safer in frontal collisions, which are the most likely to cause severe injury and death.[12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] Rear-facing group 1 car seats are becoming more widespread but are still difficult to source in many countries.

text: Group 2[edit]

text: A larger seat than the Group 1 design. These seats use an adult seat belt to hold the child in place.

text:
Position: Sitting, forward-facing or rear-facing (make sure the seat is certified for up to 25 kg)
Recommended weight: 15 kg to 25 kg (33 lb to 55 lb)
Approximate age: 4 to 6 years (Although older children can sometimes fit)

text: Group 3[edit]

text: Also known as booster seats, these position the child so that the adult seat belt is held in the correct position for safety and comfort.

text:
Position: Sitting, forward-facing
Recommended weight: 22 kg to 36 kg (48 lb to 76 lb)
Approximate age: 4 to 10, and above if the child is not 36 kg yet

text: Booster seats[edit]

text: Booster seats are recommended for children until they are big enough to properly use a seat belt. Seat belts are engineered for adults, and are thus too big for small children. In the United States, for children under the age of 4 and/or under 40 pounds (18 kg), a seat with a 5-point harness is suggested instead of a booster seat.[23]

text: Booster seats lift the child and allow the seat belt to sit firmly across the collar bone and chest, with the lap portion fitted to the hips. If the seat belt is not across the collar bone and the hips, it will ride across the neck and the stomach and cause internal injuries in the event of a collision.

text: There are two main types of boosters: high back (some of which have energy absorbing foam) and no back. A new generation of booster seats comes with rigid Isofix (Latch) connectors that secure to the vehicle's anchors, improving the seat's stability in the event of a collision.

text: The consumer group Which? is calling on manufacturers and retailers to phase out backless boosters, as it says they don't provide enough protection in side-impact crashes and could put children at risk.[24] So while backless booster cushions are better than using no child seat at all, they do not provide adequate protection in all circumstances.

text: Front-facing restraints[edit]

text: Used for Groups I, II and III.

text: After reaching one year of age and 20 pounds (9.1 kg), children may travel in forward-facing seats. Most Scandinavian countries require children to sit rear-facing until at least the age of 4 years. This has contributed to Sweden having the lowest rate of children killed in traffic in international comparisons.[25]

text: By law (in Canada and some US states), children need to be restrained until they are 4-years old and 40 pounds (18 kg). After the requirement is met, they can move into a booster seat.

text: Safety information[edit]

text: All child restraints have an expiration date. On average, most seats expire 6 years from the date of manufacture, although this can vary by manufacturer. Expiration dates are highly debated, with proponents and manufacturers claiming that older carseats can degrade over time to be less effective and that changing laws and regulations necessitate an expiration date. In addition, maintenance and parts are often not available for older models. Opponents argue that it is simply for their legal protection and to sell more carseats, and point out that manufacturers have noted that the plastics in most carseats long outlast the expiration date.

text: Like motorcycle and race car helmets, child restraints are tested for use in just one crash event. This means that if the restraint is compromised in any way (with or without the child in it), owners are strongly suggested to replace it. This is due to the uncertainty with how a compromised child restraint will perform in subsequent crashes.[citation needed]

text: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) provides guidance on the reuse of child restraint systems after a crash. Replacement of child restraints is recommended following a moderate or severe crash in order to ensure a continued high level of protection for child passengers. However, recent studies demonstrate that child restraints can withstand minor crash impacts without any documented degradation in subsequent performance.[26]

text: A minor crash is defined by the NHTSA as one in which all of the following apply:

text:
A visual inspection of the child safety seat, including inspection under any easily movable seat padding, does not reveal any cracks or deformation that might have been caused by the crash
The vehicle in which the child safety seat was installed was capable of being driven from the scene of the crash
The vehicle door nearest the child safety seat was undamaged
There were no injuries to any of the vehicle occupants
The air bags (if any) did not deploy

text: Crashes that meet all of these criteria are much less severe than the dynamic testing requirement for compliance with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 213 and are highly unlikely to affect future child safety seat performance.[26]

text: Child restraints are sometimes the subject of manufacturing recalls.[27] Recalls vary in severity; sometimes the manufacturer will send an additional part for the seat, other times they will provide an entirely new seat.

text: The purchase of a used seat is not recommended. Due to the aforementioned concerns regarding expiry dates, crash testing, and recalls, it is often impossible to determine the history of the child restraint when it is purchased second-hand.

text: Children traveling by plane are safer in a child safety seat than in a parent's arms. The FAA and the AAP recommend that all children under 40 lb use a child safety seat on a plane. Booster seats cannot be used on airplanes because they don't have shoulder belts.

text: Parents should not put children into safety seats with thick winter coats on. The coat will flatten in an accident and the straps will not be snug enough to keep the child safe.[28] An alternative would be placing a coat on the child backwards after buckling the child in.

text: Straps on the harness should be snug on the child, parents should not be able to pinch the straps away from the shoulders of the child. The straps also need to be placed at the proper height for the child.

text: Seat placement[edit]

text: A study of car crash data from 16 U.S. states found that children under the age of 3 were 43% less likely to be injured in a car crash if their car seat was fastened in the center of the back seat rather than on one side. Results were based on data from 4,790 car crashes involving children aged 3 and younger between 1998 and 2006. According to data, the center position was the safest but least used position. However, economist Steven Levitt (see below) has demonstrated that car seats do not reduce fatalities when compared to regular seat belts.[29]

text: The move from having car seats in the front passenger seat to having them in the back seat, facing backwards, may make it easier for a busy, distracted parent to leave an infant in the car.[30] Each year, between 30 and 50 infants die of heat illness and hypothermia in the United States after being left in a car.[30]

text: Law[edit]

text: Europe[edit]

text: Directive 2003/20/EC of the European Parliament and the Council[31] has mandated the use of child-restraint systems in vehicles effective May 5, 2006. Children less than 135 centimetres (53 in) tall in vehicles must be restrained by an approved child restraint system suitable for the child's size.[32] In practice, child restraint systems must be able to be fitted to the front, or other rows of seats. Children may not be transported using a rearward-facing child restraint system in a passenger seat protected by a front air bag, unless the air bag has been deactivated.[citation needed]

text: For a child restraint to be sold or used within any of the 56 UNECE member states it must be approved by the standards of UNECE Regulation 44/04, Directive 77/541/EEC or any other subsequent adaptation thereto. In order to be granted ECE R44 approval the child restraint must comply with several design, construction and production conformity standards.[33] If approval is granted the seat can display an orange label with the unique approval license number, the type of approval, the mass group approved for and the details of the manufacturer.

text: However, until May 9, 2008 member states may have permitted the use of child restraint systems approved in accordance with their national standards. EuroNCAP has developed a child-safety-protection rating to encourage improved designs. Points are awarded for universal child-restraint anchorages ISOFIX, the quality of warning labels and deactivation systems for front-passenger airbags.

text: 2013: New EU I-Size regulation is introduced: “i-Size” is the name of a new European safety regulation, UNECE Regulation 129 that affects car seats for children under 15 months of age. It came into effect in July 2013 and provides extra protection in several ways, most notably by providing rearward facing travel for children up to 15 months instead of 9 to 12 months, which the previous EU regulation advised. Read more about I-Size. This new regulation is to be phased in between 2013 and 2018 and will be run in parallel to UNECE R44/04 until 2018 when it completely supersedes it.

text: Australia[edit]

text: Australian laws regarding infants in motor vehicles were revised on November 9, 2009.[citation needed]

text: By law every child restraint sold in Australia must carry the Australian Standard AS/NZ1754 sticker (pictured right). Most overseas child restraints, including restraints from Europe and the USA, do not comply with these Standards and cannot legally be used in Australia. This also applies for ISOFIX child restraints imported from Europe or the USA.

text:
Children under seven must be restrained in a suitable, approved child restraint or booster seat.
Children under six months must be restrained in a rear-facing position.
Children between six months and under four years must be restrained in a rear- or forward-facing restraint.
Children between four and under seven must be restrained in a forward-facing restraint or booster seat.

text: In Australia there are six different types (Type A to Type F) of child restraints under the mandatory standard. Note: these restraints are NOT based on weight but on HEIGHT. All car seats with the AS/NZ1754 sticker will have height markers. These markers show clearly for what height the seat is appropriate.

text: The six types are:

text:
Type A: Rearward-facing or transversely installed restraint with a harness or other means of holding the child back
Type B: Forward-facing chair with a harness
Type C: Forward-facing harness without a chair
Type D: Rearward-facing chair with harness
Type E: a restraint that consists of either:

a booster seat or booster cushion used with a Type C child restraint and a seat belt, or with a lap-sash seat belt,
a converter seat suitable for children who weigh 18 to 32 kg.

Type F: A restraint that consists of either:

a booster seat used in conjunction with a Type C child restraint and a seatbelt, or with a lap-sash seatbelt, suitable for children approximately 4 to 10 years of age, or
a converter used in conjunction with a seatbelt, suitable for children approximately 8 to 10 years of age.

text: Combination Type A/B: Child restraints can also be a combination of the above types. For example, a Type A/B converter seat.

text: The responsibility for children under the age of 16 using restraints or safety belts correctly rests with the driver. In Queensland, penalties for drivers not ensuring that passengers under the age of 16 are properly restrained involve a fine of A$300 and three demerit points. In Victoria the penalty is a fine of A$234 and three demerit points.[citation needed] Possible suspension or cancellation of license may also apply.

text: Exemptions to the law[edit]

text:
Laws regarding taxis vary by state for infants. For children up to seven, a child restraint must be used if available, otherwise the child must use a properly fastened and adjusted seat belt.[citation needed]
A child traveling in a police or emergency vehicle.
If a child has a medical condition or physical disability that makes it impractical to use a child restraint and the driver has a certificate from a doctor indicating this is the case.[34]

text: Austria[edit]

text: All children who are smaller than 150 cm (4 ft 11 in) and younger than 14 years old must use a booster or car seat appropriate to their weight. A child must be either 14 years old or 4'11" to ride without a booster seat.

text: Canada[edit]

text:
Child restraint requirements vary from province to province.
The strictest province law requires children who are younger than 10 years and smaller than 4 ft 9 in to use a booster seat.
For safety reasons, it is generally advised to use a booster seat until the child reaches a height of 4 ft 9 in.

text: Germany[edit]

text:
All children younger than 12 years and smaller than 150 cm (4 ft 11 in)[35] must use a booster seat or child-safety seat appropriate to their weight. The Department of Transport advises that children continue to use a seat when they are 12 years or older but smaller than 150 cm (4 ft 11 in).
It is highly recommended that children younger than 14 years sit in the back seat or use a booster seat in the front seat.

text: Israel[edit]

text: 1961 Israeli transportation law states that every passenger and driver in the vehicle must either have a seat belt or a safety seat. A child under the age of 3 must be set in an approved safety seat, and until the age of 8 the child needs to be in a booster or a safety seat. Up until one year a child must ride rear-facing. The 1983 law banned children up to the age of three from sitting in front seats,[36] The Israeli transportation regulation states that a child under the weight of 36 kg, height of 140 cm, or age of 8 will use some kind of safety chair.[37]

text: The Israeli regulation states that a Sal Kal (he:סל קל lit. easy basket) is equal to European group 0 and group 0+ regulations[38]

text: An Urban legend[39] in Israel states that nursery homes and hospitals will not allow exit with an infant if a SalKal (infant carry one safety seat) is not presented.[40]

text: New Zealand[edit]

text: NZ Transport Agency governs the rules and sets standards for the health and safety aspects with respect to child restraints in New Zealand. Their guidelines dictate the minimum legal requirements for a New Zealand vehicle from the safety perspective. The correct fitting of a car seat can protect individuals and can be a life saver. This page provides details on qualified seat installation processes and approved standardized marks to look out for in child restraints. The Agency trains and certifies NZTA certified child restraint technicians who are authorized to install child safety seats.[41]

text: The NZ Transport Agency, as of March 16, 2012[42] stated that it is mandatory for the passengers to obey few below stated laws while travelling in a vehicle. These rules are regulations are set as per the age of the passengers. As of November 1, 2013, the rules are changing to mandate the use of approved child restraints for children aged 0–6. For children aged 7 a restraint must be used when it is available in the vehicle.[43]

text: Rules and regulations for different categories of age[edit]

text:
Children aged under 7 years must use an approved child restraint, unless they are travelling in a public bus, shuttle or taxi and an approved child restraint is not available.
Children aged 7 years must use an approved child restraint if one is available.
Children aged 8 years and over are not required to use a child restraint.

text: In all cases, children not in child safety seats must use a seat belt. Special rules apply to children travelling in vehicles first registered (in New Zealand or elsewhere) before 1 November 1979, since these vehicles are not required to be fitted with seat belts on all seats.

text: New Zealand Approved Marks for child restraints[edit]

text: All child restraints must meet the standards set by the NZ Transport Agency. There are different marks to indicate this approval from the safety perspective. Approved marks/symbols are shown in the table below:[45]

text:
Symbol Description
Standard followed

Tick Mark
Australia and New Zealand standard - AS/NZ 1754

'E' mark and a number
European Standard - ECE 44

'S' mark
United States Standard - FMVSS 213

text: The number after 'E' in the ECE 44 standard indicates as to which country certifies the child restraint. Hence the number differs between countries. The EU (European Union) also has similar symbols to indicate safety standards for children travelling in a vehicle.

text: Spain[edit]

text:
Front seats: children younger than 12 years or smaller than 4 feet 5 inches must use a child-safety seat. Persons bigger than 135 cm (4 ft 5 in) may use the adult safety belt.
Rear seats: persons smaller than 135 cm must use a child-safety seat. Also true for kids younger than 12 years.

text: United Kingdom[edit]

text: From September 18, 2006, All children under the age of 12 have to use some form of child car seat, unless they are taller than 135 cm (4 ft 5in).[46][47]

text: United States[edit]

text:
Child restraint requirements differ for the various states in the United States.
In Florida and South Dakota, children who are four years or older can use an adult seat belt without a child safety seat. In the rest of the country, a booster seat or otherwise appropriate child restraint is required until the child is between five and nine years old, depending on the state.
Most states include in their law a requirement that all infants ride rear-facing until they are BOTH one year of age AND at least 20 pounds.[48] Though it is not included in every state's law, no child safety restraint marketed to the US will accommodate an infant less than 20 pounds, some no less than 22 pounds, in a forward-facing position. As of 2011, most children ride rear-facing until they are at least 2 years of age.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) advises the use of a child restraint or a booster seat for all children who are shorter than 4 ft 9 in, regardless of age and weight, or even longer if the belts hit the child at the wrong place. Some booster seats can be used for children up to 60 inches and 120 pounds.
Many state laws prefer that children 12 years and younger sit in the back seat if available. Some states, as is the case in Michigan, forbid placing a child under the age of 4 years in a front seat if a rear seat is available.
Some states require that all child safety seats be used in full accordance with the manufacturer's instructions in what is sometimes referred to as a "proper use clause".

text: Manufacturing[edit]

text: Though there are hundreds of variations of makes and models in the world of child safety seats, the materials used in the manufacturing process are basically the same. Factories in which the seats are put together receive loads of polypropylene pellets.[49] Foam makes up the padding of the individual seats, while vinyl and fabrics are used to make up the covers for the seats as well as the harnesses.

text: A safety seat increases the safety of a properly restrained child in the case of a motor vehicle accident. The safety seat includes foam padding, fabric covers, a harness, and buckles or attaching mechanisms. Labels and instructions are also attached. Every child safety seat will have an expiration date on it. The Safe Kids USA organization does not recommend using a child safety seat that is more than 6 years old[citation needed]. Periodically, child safety seats are recalled by manufacturers for safety reasons. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration posts a link to recent recall information at nhtsa.gov.

text: Types[edit]

text: There are different types of child safety seats for children of different sizes and ages.

text:
Infant seats - Child safety seats made specifically for infants are the smallest and have carrying handles for easy carrying and loading. Newborns are most often placed in a rear-facing seat. These seats are designed for infants is up to 22 pounds (10.0 kg) to 32 pounds (15 kg), depending on the model.
Convertible seats - Similar to the infant seat, the convertible seat can be used in a rear- or forward-facing position and is used for children typically beginning at 5 pounds (2.3 kg) up to 50 pounds (23 kg). The rear-facing position is used for children until they weigh more than 20 pounds (9.1 kg) and are at least two years old. Research studies and crash test results show that children are safer in a rear-facing child safety seat. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends keeping children in a rear-facing seat until “they are 2 years of age or until they reach the highest weight or height allowed by their car safety seat’s manufacturer” (www.healthychildren.org).

text:
Combination seats - The combination seat or five-point booster is a forward-facing seat that has a five-point harness system. It can be modified to a belt-positioning booster by removing some webbing[50]
Booster seats - The earlier described combination seat can become a high back belt positioning booster. There is also a high back belt positioning booster that is available for that purpose only. The other type of belt positioning booster is the low back or no back booster. The major differences between the low and high back booster seats are head support and improved protection in side-impact collisions. Vehicles with a bench seating and no headrest are required to use a high back booster. The purpose of the booster seats is to provide elevation to the child so the shoulder belt rests appropriately on the shoulder blade and does not ride up the child’s neck. It also provides “hips” that the seat belt can rest securely across and remain on the large bones of the child instead of resting across the soft tissue of the abdomen. This seat is available for children over 40 pounds (18 kg) up to over 100 pounds (45 kg).[51] From the ages of eight to twelve, children may have outgrown their booster seats and can be permitted to use regular adult seat restraints. It is suggested that, until the age of thirteen, the child remains in the back seat.

text: Hazards[edit]

text: Manufacturers have quality controls to ensure seats are properly put together and packaged. However, it is not guaranteed that the included instructions are always adhered to and correctly followed. Up to 95% of the safety seats that are installed may not be the right seat for the child, may be hooked into the vehicle loosely, may be hooked with an incompatible belt in the vehicle, may have harnesses incorrectly fastened in some way, or may be incorrectly placed in front of air bags. In 1997, six out of ten children who were killed in vehicle crashes were not correctly restrained.[49]

text: Along with the problem of instructions not being followed properly, there are other hazards that can affect children involving these safety seats. A recent study[clarification needed] attributed many cases of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) to the prolonged sitting or lying position these infants are in when putting the safety seats to use. When researchers reviewed more than 500 infant deaths, it was found that 17 of these deaths occurred while the infant was in a device such as a child safety seat. The age of the most occurring rates of death by SIDS in a child safety device was found to be under one month, having six of the 17 deaths happen in this age group. Although SIDS has been found to be a high risk regarding child safety seats, a coroner in Quebec also stated that “putting infants in car seats…causes breathing problems and should be discouraged."[52] His warning came after the death of a two-month-old boy who was left to nap in a child safety seat positioned inside his crib rather than the crib itself. The death was linked to positional asphyxiation.[52] This means that the child was in a position causing him to slowly lose his supply of oxygen. Coroner Jacques Robinson said it's common for a baby's head to slump forward while in a car seat that is not properly installed in a car and that can diminish a baby's ability to take in oxygen. "The car seat is for the car," he said. "It's not for a bed or sleeping." Robinson added, however, he has nothing against car seats when they are properly used. The coroner said that it is common for a baby’s head to “slump forward while in a car seat and that it diminishes oxygen”.[52]

text: The American Academy of Pediatrics says to “make sure the seat is at the correct angle so your infant’s head does not flop forward. Many seats have angle indicators or adjusters that can help prevent this. If your seat does not have an angle adjuster, tilt the car safety seat back by putting a rolled towel or other firm padding (such as a pool noodle) under the base near the point where the back and bottom of the vehicle seat meet.” Safety seats come with an instruction booklet with additional information on the appropriate angle for the seat.

text: Criticism[edit]

text: There has been some criticism of forward-facing child safety seats, in particular by the economist Steven D. Levitt, author of the popular book Freakonomics. In a 2005 article in the New York Times, Levitt suggests that the available data does not support the necessity of forward-facing child safety seats for children over two years old, arguing that the cheaper and simpler alternative of seat belts offers similar protection as forward-facing seats.[53] Levitt was a guest at the TED conference in the same year, and gave a lecture making the same case.[29] Levitt's study and findings have been criticized and refuted by subsequent peer reviewed studies, which found child safety seats offer a considerable safety advantage over seat belts alone.[54]


document_title: Internet censorship in India

question_text: what is illegal to view on the internet in india

question_tokens: what is illegal to view on the internet in india

root

text: Internet censorship in India

text: Overview[edit]

text: OpenNet Initiative report[edit]

text: The OpenNet Initiative classified India as engaged in "selective" Internet filtering in the political, conflict/security, social, and Internet tools areas in 2011.[1][2] ONI describes India as:

tag: p

text: Reporters Without Borders "countries under surveillance"[edit]

text: In March 2012, Reporters Without Borders added India to its list of "countries under surveillance",[3] stating that:

text: Freedom House report[edit]

text: Freedom House's Freedom on the Net 2016 report gives India a Freedom on the Net status of "Partly Free" with a rating of 41 (scale from 0 to 100, lower is better). Its Obstacles to Access was rated 12 (0-25 scale), Limits on Content was rated 9 (0-35 scale) and Violations of User Rights was rated 20 (0-40 scale).[4] India was ranked 29th out of the 65 countries included in the report.[5]

text: The Freedom on the Net 2012 report, says:[6]

text:
India's overall Internet Freedom Status is "Partly Free", unchanged from 2009.
India has a score of 39 on a scale from 0 (most free) to 100 (least free), which places India 20 out of the 47 countries worldwide that were included in the 2012 report. India ranked 14 out of 37 countries in the 2011 report.
India ranks third out of the eleven countries in Asia included in the 2012 report.
Prior to 2008, censorship of Internet content by the Indian government was relatively rare and sporadic.
Following the November 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai, which killed 171 people, the Indian Parliament passed amendments to the Information Technology Act (ITA) that expanded the government's censorship and monitoring capabilities.
While there is no sustained government policy or strategy to block access to Internet content on a large scale, measures for removing certain content from the web, sometimes for fear they could incite violence, have become more common.
Pressure on private companies to remove information that is perceived to endanger public order or national security has increased since late 2009, with the implementation of the amended ITA. Companies are required to have designated employees to receive government blocking requests, and assigns up to seven years' imprisonment private service providers—including ISPs, search engines, and cybercafes—that do not comply with the government's blocking requests.
Internet users have sporadically faced prosecution for online postings, and private companies hosting the content are obliged by law to hand over user information to the authorities.
In 2009, the Supreme Court ruled that bloggers and moderators can face libel suits and even criminal prosecution for comments posted on their websites.
Prior judicial approval for communications interception is not required and both central and state governments have the power to issue directives on interception, monitoring, and decryption. All licensed ISPs are obliged by law to sign an agreement that allows Indian government authorities to access user data.

tag: ul

text: Background[edit]

text: In June 2000, the Indian Parliament created the Information Technology (IT) Act to provide a legal framework to regulate Internet use and commerce, including digital signatures, security, and hacking.[1] The act criminalises the publishing of obscene information electronically and grants police powers to search any premises without a warrant and arrest individuals in violation of the act. A 2008 amendment to the IT Act reinforced the government's power to block Internet sites and content and criminalised sending messages deemed inflammatory or offensive.[7]

text: Internet filtering can also be mandated through licensing requirements. For example, ISPs seeking licences to provide Internet services with the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) "shall block Internet sites and/or individual subscribers, as identified and directed by the Telecom Authority from time to time" in the interests of "national security".[8] Licence agreements also require ISPs to prevent the transmission of obscene or otherwise objectionable material.[9]

text: In 2001, the Bombay High Court appointed a committee to oversee issues relating to online pornography and Cybercrime.[10] The Court invited the petitioners, Jayesh Thakkar and Sunil Thacker, to make recommendations on cyber laws. The committee published a report which analyses the key issues and made recommendations regarding areas such as the licensing of cyber cafés, putative identity cards for cyber cafe visitors, that minors use computers in public spaces, and the maintenance of IP logs by cyber cafes. The Committee also recommended that internet service providers keep correct time logs and records.

text: The report also addressed the protection of children from adult websites and advised internet service providers to provide parental control software for every Internet connection. The committee also identified lack of technical knowledge in the police as a problem. The report was well received by the courts, and its recommendations are being implemented the police and cyber cafés. The Cyber Crime Investigation Cell was set up pursuant to a recommendation made by the committee.

text: In 2003, the Government of India established the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-IN) to ensure Internet security.[11] Its stated mission is "to enhance the security of India's Communications and Information Infrastructure through proactive action and effective collaboration".[12] CERT-IN is the agency that accepts and reviews requests to block access to specific websites. All licensed Indian ISPs must comply with CERT-IN decisions. There is no review or appeals process. Many institutions, including the Ministry of Home Affairs, courts, the intelligence services, the police and the National Human Rights Commission, may call on it for specialist expertise. By stretching the prohibition against publishing obscene content to include the filtering of Web sites, CERT-IN was empowered to review complaints and act as the sole authority for issuing blocking instructions to the Department of Telecommunications (DOT). Many have argued that giving CERT-IN this power through executive order violates constitutional jurisprudence holding that specific legislation must be passed before the government can encroach on individual rights.[1]

text: "I am mystified by our government's approach both to the internet and to the millions of Indians using it. It does not adhere to the values of our republic and democracy. This matter needs to be addressed urgently, for which I propose to file a PIL in the Supreme Court. Don't kill the freedom of speech, change the IT Rules", says Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Member of Parliament.[13]

text: Instances of censorship[edit]

text: Dawn website (1999)[edit]

text: Immediately after the Kargil War in 1999, the website of the Pakistani daily newspaper Dawn was blocked from access within India by Videsh Sanchar Nigam Limited, a government-owned telecommunications company which at the time had monopoly control of the international internet gateways in India.[14][15] Rediff, a media news website, claimed that the ban was instigated by the Indian government, and then published detailed instructions as to how one could bypass the filter and view the site.[16]

text: Yahoo Groups (2003)[edit]

text: In September 2003, Kynhun, a Yahoo group linked to the "Hynniewtrep National Liberation Council" (an illegal, minor separatist group from Meghalaya), which discussed the case of the Khasi tribe was banned.[17] The Department of Telecommunications asked Indian ISPs to block the group, but difficulties led to all Yahoo! groups being banned for approximately two weeks.[18]

text: Websites blocked (2006)[edit]

text: In July 2006, the Indian government ordered the blocking of 17 websites, including some hosted on the Geocities, Blogspot and Typepad domains. Initial implementation difficulties led to these domains being blocked entirely.[19][20][21] Access to sites on these domains other than those specifically banned was restored by most ISPs after about a week.[22]

text: Orkut and Indian law enforcement agreement (2007)[edit]

text: In 2007, Indian law enforcement entered an agreement with the then popular social networking site Orkut to track down what it deems defamatory content which, in their example, includes content critical of Bal Thackeray.[23]

text: New IT rules adopted[edit]

text: The "IT Rules 2011" were adopted in April 2011 as a supplement to the 2000 Information Technology Act (ITA). The new rules require Internet companies to remove within 36 hours of being notified by the authorities any content that is deemed objectionable, particularly if its nature is "defamatory," “hateful," “harmful to minors," or "infringes copyright". Cybercafé owners are required to photograph their customers, follow instructions on how their cafés should be set up so that all computer screens are in plain sight, keep copies of client IDs and their browsing histories for one year, and forward this data to the government each month.[3]

text: Websites banned[edit]

text: In March 2011, the Government banned several websites, Typepad, Mobango, Clickatell, and Facebook for sometime without warning.[24]

text: On 21 July 2011, all file hosting websites were blocked by ISPs to prevent copyright infringement of the film Singham, causing anger amongst Internet users.[25] This ban was later lifted.

text: On 24 December 2011, Reliance Communications, a widely used ISP, again blocked access to file-sharing sites, having obtained a John Doe order from a Delhi court to help protect the movie Don 2 several days before its release. The block was lifted on 30 December 2011.[26][27]

text: Pre-screening of Internet content[edit]

text: On 5 December 2011, The New York Times India Ink reported that the Indian government had asked several social media sites and internet companies, including Google, Facebook and Yahoo!, to "prescreen user content from India and to remove disparaging, inflammatory or defamatory content before it goes online."[28] Top officials from the Indian units of Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and Facebook had several meetings with Kapil Sibal, India's acting telecommunications minister to discuss the issue in recent months, India Ink reported. In one meeting, Sibal asked these companies "to use human beings to screen content, not technology," the article said.

text: On 6 December 2011, communications minister of India Kapil Sibal held a press conference confirming the India Ink story. "We have to take care of the sensibilities of our people," Mr. Sibal told more than 100 reporters during a press conference on the lawn at his home in New Delhi. "Cultural ethos is very important to us."[29][30]

text: On 7 December 2011, The Times of India revealed that the search engine Google was asked to remove around 358 items by the Government of India out of which 255 items were said to criticise the government as per a Google transparency report. The government had asked Google to remove 236 items from Orkut and 19 items from YouTube for the same reason, it added. Other reasons include defamation (39 requests), privacy and security (20 requests), impersonation (14 requests), hate speech (8 requests), pornography (3 requests) and national security (1 request). Google admitted that 51 per cent of the total requests were partially or fully complied with.[31]

text: The news of banning and blocking objectionable content on the internet was seen negatively by many Indian netizens and #IdiotKapilSibal trended on Twitter after netizens expressed the outrage over the move.[32] It was seen as a way to block websites criticising the government. In an interview to NDTV, Kapil Sibal responded by saying that most of the content being asked to be removed was pornographic in nature and involved deities, which could have caused communal disharmony.[33] While Kapil Sibal claimed that the government wanted to remove pornographic content, Google transparency report published by Google claims that the content that included protests against social leaders or used offensive language in reference to religious leaders were not removed.[34] Google on its transparency report states[35]

text: "We received requests from state and local law enforcement agencies to remove YouTube videos that displayed protests against social leaders or used offensive language in reference to religious leaders. We declined the majority of these requests and only locally restricted videos that appeared to violate local laws prohibiting speech that could incite enmity between communities. In addition, we received a request from a local law enforcement agency to remove 236 communities and profiles from orkut that were critical of a local politician. We did not comply with this request, since the content did not violate our Community Standards or local law."

text: Google on this matter has also said that[36]

text: "When content is legal and does not violate our policies, we will not remove it just because it is controversial, as we believe that people's differing views, so long as they are legal, should be respected and protected."

text: While presently there are talks going on between the government and officials of internet companies like Google and Facebook, there is no consensus on this issue.[37]

text: Ban on Cartoons Against Corruption[edit]

text: In 2011, a nationwide anti corruption movement India Against Corruption gathered pace in the leadership of a veteran Gandhian Anna Hazare demanding Jan Lokpal Bill. Political cartoonist Aseem Trivedi joined the crusade and started a cartoon based campaign, Cartoons Against Corruption to support the movement with his art. He launched a website www.cartoonsagainstcorruption.com consisting of his sharp anti corruption cartoons targeting corrupt system and the politicos. He displayed his cartoons in the MMRDA ground, Mumbai during the hunger strike of Anna Hazare.[38][39]

text: Aseem Trivedi was exhibiting his political cartoons from Cartoons Against Corruption in the anti-corruption protest at the MMRDA grounds, when his website was suspended by Crime Branch, Mumbai. It was only 27 December, the first day of the protest, when he received an email from BigRock, the domain name registrar with which his website was registered, saying, "We have received a complaint from Crime Branch, Mumbai against domain name 'cartoonsagainstcorruption.com' for displaying objectionable pictures and texts related to flag and emblem of India. Hence we have suspended the domain name and its associated services."[40]

text: The site was suspended after a complaint to the Mumbai Crime Branch by a Mumbai-based advocate and congress leader, R.P. Pandey. The complaint stated that "defamatory and derogatory cartoons" were displayed as posters during Mr. Hazare's hunger strike in Mumbai. Noting that the posters were created by Aseem Trivedi and "are believed to be made at the instance of Shri Anna Hazare," the complaint requested "strict legal action in the matter."[41]

text: Following his website's ban, Aseem Trivedi uploaded all the cartoons to a blog he quickly created.[42]

text: Delhi court summons[edit]

text: In January 2012, a Delhi court issues summons to Google and Facebook headquarters for objectionable content.[43] This was followed by the Delhi High Court saying that websites such as Google and Facebook were liable for the content, posted on their platform by users, as they benefited from the content.[44] Google responded to both the Court and the Minister for Communication and IT Kapil Sibal, stating that it was impossible to pre-screen content.[45] A plea was made by an educationist citing any sanctions on the online services will directly affect the fundamental right and will be against public interest.[46] The Delhi Court also allowed Yahoo's case to be heard separately after it appealed citing it did not host any objectionable content and does not fall under the social networking site category.[47]

text: Websites blocked[edit]

text: Starting 3 May 2012, a number of websites including Vimeo, The Pirate Bay, Torrentz and other torrent sites were allegedly blocked by Reliance Communications, on orders from Department of Telecom without any stated reasons or prior warnings.[48][49]

text: Reliance DNS servers compromised[edit]

text: In May 2012, Anonymous India (AnonOpsIndia), a branch of the hacktivist group Anonymous hacked the servers of Reliance Communications to protest the blocking of Vimeo, The Pirate Bay, Torrentz and other torrent sites. Reliance Communications, an ISP stated that it simply followed a court order.[50][51] The group also hacked Reliance DNS servers preventing direct access to Twitter, Facebook and many other websites in India on 26 May 2012 for allegedly blocking its Twitter handle @OpIndia_Revenge.[52] They went on to warn the Government to restore all the blocked websites till 9 June 2012, and has planned a nationwide protests on the same date.[53][54] After this hack, Anonymous also released a list of websites that had been blocked by Reliance without any orders from the government, raising questions of private and unaccountable censorship by telecom providers.[55]

text: Annulment motion in Parliament against 2011 IT Rules[edit]

text: An annulment motion against the Information Technology (Inter-mediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011 moved by Member of Parliament (MP) P Rajeev of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) in the Rajya Sabha, was the first serious attempt by internet freedom activists to get the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 discussed and reviewed by the country's lawmakers. Not unexpectedly, the motion (specifically against the rules governing intermediaries – clause (zg) of subsection (2) of Section 87 read with subsection (2) of Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000) was not carried. However, the discussion that preceded it at least demonstrated the concerns of parliamentarians about what internet freedom activists have termed the "draconian" provisions of the IT Act.[56][57]

text: Save Your Voice campaign[edit]

text: Save Your Voice is a movement against Internet censorship in India.[58] It is founded by cartoonist Aseem Trivedi and journalist Alok Dixit in January 2012. The movement opposes Information Technology Act of India and demands democratic rules for the governance of Internet. The campaign is targeted at the draconian rules framed under the Information Technology Act, 2000.[59]

text: Madras High Court: Entire websites cannot be blocked[edit]

text: On 15 June 2012, the Madras High Court has passed an order saying that entire websites cannot be blocked on the basis of "John Doe" orders. The High Court order reads:

text:
“
The order of interim injunction dated 25 April 2012 is hereby clarified that the interim injunction is granted only in respect of a particular URL where the infringing movie is kept and not in respect of the entire website. Further, the applicant is directed to inform about the particulars of URL where the interim movie is kept within 48 hours.[60]
”

tag: table

text: The High court provided this clarification after being approached by a consortium of Internet Service Providers. The order has been welcomed by the Indian media and net users.[61][62]

text: Domain hosting sites[edit]

text: Starting in July 2012 several domain hosting sites were banned. When opening these sites, a message saying that these sites have been blocked by the Department of Telecommunications or court order is displayed.[63][64] Sites such as Buydomains.com, Fabulous.com, and Sedo.co.uk were blocked.

text: Censorship following Assam violence[edit]

text: Between 18 and 21 August 2012 the Government of India ordered more than 300 specific URLs blocked. The blocked articles, accounts, groups, and videos were said to contain inflammatory content with fictitious details relating to Assam violence and supposedly promoting the NE exodus. These specific URLs include the domains of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, BlogSpot, WordPress, Google Plus, Wikipedia, Times of India, and other websites.[65] Many of the blocked URLs are Indian right wing activism against corruption.[66][67] This raised questions about freedom of speech in the largest democracy of the world. It also raised questions about the censorship of people and posts debunking rumors.[68] The Economic Times called the level of censorship as those "that have not so far been seen in India".[69] Over four days from 18 August, the Government of India issued directives to Internet Service Providers to block Twitter accounts of two Delhi based journalists - Kanchan Gupta and Shiv Aroor - and Pravin Togadia. The government also blocked the website of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and several other right-wing websites.[69] In addition, articles from Wikipedia, and news reports of violence in Assam on the websites of The Times of India, Firstpost, The Daily Telegraph and Al-jazeera were blocked.[69] A petition was created to oppose Internet censorship in India by the Indian diaspora in the US.[70]

text: Telecom Minister's website defaced[edit]

text: In November 2012, Anonymous India defaced Indian Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal's constituency website in protest against an amendment to the Information Technology Act and the recent crackdown on netizens for comments posted online.[71][72]

text: BSNL website defaced[edit]

text: Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited's (BSNL) website, www.bsnl.co.in, was hacked by Anonymous India on 13 December 2012. They defaced the website with a picture stating that they protest against section 66A of the IT Act and in support of cartoonist Aseem Trivedi and Alok Dixit. The duo have gone on a hunger striker to protest against Section 66A.[73][74]

text: 39 websites blocked[edit]

text: In an order dated 13 June 2013, the Department of Telecom (DoT) directed Indian Internet service providers (ISPs) to block 39 websites. The order didn't specify a reason or law under which the websites were blocked. Most are web forums, where Internet users share images and URLs to pornographic files. However, some of the websites are also image and file hosts, mostly used to store and share files that are not pornographic. While watching or distributing child pornography is illegal in India, watching adult pornography is not. The blocked websites are hosted outside India and claim to operate under the U.S. rule that requires performers to be over 18 years of age.[75]

text: File sharing and file hosting sites banned[edit]

text: In an order dated 23 June 2014, the Delhi High Court upon a request made by Sony Entertainment ordered 472 file sharing and file hosting websites blocked, including The Pirate Bay, Google Docs, Google Videos, and Google’s URL shorterner (goo.gl). This is contrary to the 2012 Madras High Court orders which blocked only URLs referencing web pages with illegal content, rather than entire websites.[76] However, it was reported on 7 July 2014 that an updated court order blocks just 219 sites. Included are many file storage and torrent websites, but no Google sites.[77]

text: Whistle blower Savukku's site blocked by Judge C T Selvam[edit]

text: In an interim order on the petition filed by news reader Mahalaxmi, Justice Cyril Selvam blocked the entire website www.savukku.net. This order on 28 Feb 2014 directly contradicts an earlier order by Madras High Court on 15 Apr 2012 against banning entire website instead of specific URLs.[78]

text: Earlier in Feb, savukku.net had exposed the tapes of conversations between DMK MP Kanimozhi and former Additional Director General of Police (ADGP) Jaffer Sait, Jaffer Sait and Kalaignar TV's former director Sharad Kumar, and DMK President M Karunanidhi's Secretary K.Shanmuganathan and Jaffer Sait.[79]

text: Judge C T Selvam is considered to be close to Karunanidhi's family.

text:
“
Justice CT Selvam became judge of the Madras High Court when Karunanidhi was the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu during 2006 - 2011. Just a couple of hours before taking oath as judge Justice Selvam called on Karunanidhi and got his blessings and this was revealed through a govt press release with photograph by the Tamil Nadu govt's Information Department.[79]
”

text: Ban to porn sites[edit]

text: The Indian government banned access to sites hosting pornography in November 2014.[80][81] The ban was later lifted within a week due to heavy public pressure.

text: Kamlesh Vaswani, the lawyer behind the ban in his petition said: “Watching porn itself puts the country’s security in danger, encourages violent acts, unacceptable behaviour in society, exploitation of children and lowers the dignity of women and he believes watching online pornography has a direct co-relation with crimes against women.” To say Indian women watch porn is an insult to their dignity, watching porn also promotes sexual violence against women and children, he said. He states “Pornography creates stereotypes representation of women and becomes the basis behind unequal treatment (sic) of women in society.”[82]

text: Chetan Bhagat, an investment banker turned novelist, described the porn ban as "anti-freedom," "impractical" and "not enforceable." He satirically suggested that India next ban olive oil (as being too Western), comedic television, and pizza (due to not being Indian cuisine). "Anyone who has an opinion different from yours must be banned," Bhagat said on Twitter. "After all, you are always right."[83]

text: 32 blocked websites[edit]

text: The DOT ordered blocking of 32 websites including archive.org, github, dailymotion, vimeo as they could host terror content relating to ISIS but the sites are no longer blocked as of 1 January 2015 as the order had been reversed and the unblocking process has begun on compliant websites.[84]

text: 2015 - now[edit]

text: As of 1 August, 857 pornographic sites have not been accessible via various ISPs across country.[85] This list was given to government officials by petitioner Kamlesh Vaswani on Oct 17, 2014. The original list was generated by a company which makes porn blocking software and contained many popular porn sites.[86] The block was ordered by government Department of Telecom on 31 July 2015. The copy of order is available through media websites.[87][88] The blocking of pornography sites comes on the heels of the center vowing to block all such sites on the 8th of July.

text: On 3 August 2015, a spokesman of the Department of Telecommunication said in a statement that Internet service providers (ISPs) have been asked by the Modi Government of India to block 857 websites, on the basis of restricting access to pornographic content.[89][90][91] The ban was later lifted by DoT on the basis that excessive blocking disrupts the regular usage of internet services, after wide protests by Indians online, but the blocks were re-instituted without comment starting September, 2015.[citation needed] As of 2015, India now blocks more Facebook content than any other nation.[92]

text: Some Bollywood studios came up with public education message that black money generated from pre-release of their content through offline markets are sourced for terrorism, though sources were not cleared. Reports show dents that these pirated videos make are significantly low, in Indian culture. In top ten actors who gets paid the most includes Indian actors, that's how rich the film culture is when lopsidedly there are generations who are brought up in poverty and related malignance.[93]

text: In September 2016, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare told a court that Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo! had agreed to censor all information on their search engines related to prenatal sex discernment in order to comply with the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994.[94][95]

text: In August 2017, Madras High Court banned Wayback Archive.[96]

text: Blocked websites[edit]

text: Over the years, the government has banned thousands of websites and URLs in the country with the help of internet service providers or under the directive of the courts. For example, in August 2015, the government banned at least 857 sites for their pornographic contents and in June 2016, the government further banned over 200 URLs for providing 'Escort Services'.[97]

text: In August 2015, the Central government of India ordered TRAI and Internet Service Providers based in India to ban domestic and international porn websites. In response, nearly 857 websites were blocked.[98] Star India Pvt Ltd, an entertainment company owned by 21st Century Fox have successfully gained authorization through hoodwinking the court. They can now force ISPs to block entire websites to tackle Internet piracy and sharing for their copyrighted content. This was gained through falsifying data that these sites are uploading videos when it is a user centered activity and covering up the fact each of these websites have active departments to regulate any sorts of infringement and misuse of their services. Prathiba M Singh, who had represented Star India, cited poor resources of media giants like Star India, for targeting these domains without block expiry period and their legal team termed these sites as "rogue sites" and expressed delight in their successive filing from 2014 and incognito win to violate freedom of trade on the Internet at least in India. Though some critics say this would be lifted eventually by seeing the fallacy as in similar previous cases.[99] Many has raised there voice through social media that the proceedings being overly suspicious and was gained for a alternate means, which is aimed for profiting rather than the initial spike of alleged piracy of these copyrighted contents and strengthening an ongoing practice of bottle-necking the internet users to forced payment and culture of on-demand online access to content.[100][101] This has happened in the same week were media personnel's filter-free over indulgences to manipulate ongoing cases and political statements without any guidelines were appalled by Lawyers in the country.[102][103]

text: In 2016, India also put forwarded a new plan to control internet usage of its netizen's. Accessing or pop-ups from ad services or malware infection of websites banned in India might invite 3 years of jail sentence and a fine of Rs 3 lakh. As of now URLs and websites were blocked using DNS-filtering. This means the DNS of the blocked site was added to a list maintained by the internet service provider and whenever a user tried connecting to that site, the DNS server of the internet service provider would block that request. The respected officials suspect netizens are circumventing these measures knowingly or unknowingly. Government also intends to provide wide educative information classes, provision of free operating system with utilities for malware free access to internet and for computerized activities of daily life as a primary method. Currently the government are joining hands with media content providers and internet service providers like big companies Tata Communications and Airtel to manage a number of internet gateways in India. Though many legal, technical and social action groups consider this as a threatening approach. Many social action groups say that these as inappropriate time and money spend while real issues like unemployment, access to education, freedom of practicing religion, women and children safety, drug use are ever rising. Lawyers with technical background say this might be warning message and DNS filtering is a better practice for enforcing Anti-piracy laws in current India. Some of them are also wary about how will these actions get reflected in terms hostility towards human rights, implications of these fines, profiteering stakeholders agendas, is it the government's first step to a long term plan "monitoring the whole world wide web" as China does. Many of these services are malvertising, click away access and pops ups, how does the government intend to tackle these issues and problems with the current plan that is heavily in favor of corporation's margin and doesn't cater to its users needs. Other groups express their fear and uneasiness whether these will lead to emergency era like arrests where anything that government bodies believe is an "offence under the laws of India, including but not limited to under Sections 63, 63-A, 65 and 65-A of the Copyright Act, 1957".[104]

text: Warning that allegedly created for TATA and Airtel users with threats implied beyond normal DoT remainder and block message shows as:[105]

text: This URL has been blocked under the instructions of the Competent Government Authority or in compliance with the orders of a Court of competent jurisdiction. Viewing, downloading, exhibiting or duplicating an illicit copy of the contents under this URL is punishable as an offence under the laws of India, including but not limited to under Sections 63, 63-A, 65 and 65-A of the Copyright Act, 1957 which prescribe imprisonment for 3 years and also fine of upto Rs. 3,00,000/-. Any person aggrieved by any such blocking of this URL may contact at urlblock [at] tatacommunications [dot] com who will, within 48 hours, provide you the details of relevant proceedings under which you can approach the relevant High Court or Authority for redressal of your grievance

text: Current situation that have led to this sudden moves is reported to be by influence of film studios in India and courts who have regularly issued orders in the favor for them. Often these are done with the contracted lawyers of film studios approach courts in regular intervals ahead and after a movie's release seeking preventive blocks on the URLs they compile and list. This lists in reality are unprofessionally and "poorly compiled and often block is sought on full websites just on the basis of whims and fancies". "Once this order are issued, the copies of the order along with the list of URLs to be blocked go to DoT, which then they pass an order to internet service providers to block these sites". The interesting part here is that once a URL is blocked it remains blocked, even years after the release of the film without an expiry. Patent lawyers also suggest to make practical changes in its laws according to the current e-environment like making materials accessible within six months to one year and protecting the content from manipulation and creative infringement of the same under copyright laws to lessen the current piracy problems.[106]

text: Usage of Internet kill switch[edit]

text: Jammu & Kashmir[edit]

text: The State government shut down the Internet on 17–18 March 2014 - 2017 in Jammu and Kashmir to stop separatists from addressing a United Nations Human Rights Council sideline event via video link in Geneva.[107] Internet was shutdown again for mobile and landline broadband in July 2016 against the backdrop of protests 2016 Kashmir unrest.

text: The state government of Jammu and Kashmir on 26 April 2017[108] ordered the various Internet service providers (ISP s) operating in the valley to block access to 22 social networking websites for one month saying among other things, "... endangering public life and property and causing unrest/ disharmony in the state". Pertinently, the order was passed by exercising the powers conferred under the "Indian Telegraph Act, 1885" which technically became obsolete circa 2008 when the Government of India decided to stop all telegraph services in the country. As a result of this censorship, people living in the valley have resorted to circumvention tactics in the form of using web proxies, VPNs among other things. The popularity of these tactics have compelled the government to block access to Android play store among other services for some time in a bid to prevent citizens from getting access to these services.

text: The banned services include widely used services like Facebook, Twitter, Whatsapp but also surprisingly the list includes websites like QQ, Baidu, Qzone, which aren't used outside of mainland China. Xanga, a website featured in the list shut down in 2013.[109] These websites mostly being in mandarin has people concerned that the censorship has been an attempt to suppress dissent only by all means necessary, as opposed to their claim of "maintaining peace and harmony".

text: Gujarat[edit]

text: The State government shut down the Internet in Vadodara, Gujarat from September 27, 2014 for 3 days due to communal clashes between two communities, even though only the central government has the power to shut down the Internet under Information Technology Act, 2000[110] and that too, under a declared State of emergency under article 352 of the Constitution of India when freedom of speech and expression is suspended. No formal announcement was made regarding this by the city police or the Internet service providers.[111][112][113]

text: When Patidar reservation agitation turned violent on 25 August 2015, the internet service on mobile phones and certain websites like WhatsApp and Facebook on broadband were blocked for six days from 26 August 2015 to 31 August 2015 across the state.[114]

text: Nagaland 2015[edit]

text: The State government of Nagaland shut down the Internet in the entire state from 7 March 2015 for 48 hours due to mob lynching of a man.[115][116]

text: Nagaland 2017[edit]

text: Both SMS and internet/data services were suspended in Nagaland from the 30th of January, which were restored on the 20th of February after being blocked for 20 days.The block was initiated to prevent the spread of violence in the state. This situation come up when two Naga tribal bodies had served a three-day ultimatum to Zeliang to step down following the government’s decision to hold local bodies elections with 33 per cent reservation for women in 12 towns across the state and the death of two persons in clashes between the police and protestors at Dimapur, the commercial hub of Nagaland, on the night of January 31 .[117][118][119]

text: Manipur 2015[edit]

text: The State government of Manipur shut down the Internet of some service provider those who provide Internet through mobile technology 2G/3G/4G in Manipur from 1 September evening to 8 September 2015 afternoon due to agitated over the passing of three Bills, police and protesters clashed in different areas of Churachandpur district as mobs went on rampage attacking residences of Ministers, MLAs and MP. [120][121]

text: Manipur 2016[edit]

text: The State government of Manipur ordered by respective DC to shutting down Mobile data service in Imphal west and Imphal east district from 17 December 2016 till further order [1]. On 18 December 2016 Home department of Government of Manipur ordered to shutdown all Mobile data service, SMS in Manipur from 10 AM of 18 December 2016 to 10 AM of 30 December 2016. Situation come up after the blocked of National Highways by UNC [2] for more than 50 days and attack to police personal at Lokchao by NSCN-IM [3]


document_title: Cypress Hill

question_text: who is the lead singer of cypress hill

question_tokens: who is the lead singer of cypress hill

text: Cypress Hill

text: History[edit]

text: Formation (1988)[edit]

text: Senen Reyes (also known as Sen Dog) and Ulpiano Sergio Reyes (also known as Mellow Man Ace) are brothers born in Pinar del Río, Cuba. In 1971, their family immigrated to the United States from Cuba. They initially lived in South Gate, California. In 1988, the two brothers teamed up with New York City native Lawrence Muggerud (also known as DJ Muggs, previously in a rap group named 7A3) and Louis Freese (also known as B-Real) to form a hip-hop group named DVX (Devastating Vocal Excellence). The band soon lost Mellow Man Ace to a solo career, and changed their name to Cypress Hill, after a street in South Gate.[4]

text: Early works and mainstream success (1989–95)[edit]

text: After recording a demo in 1989, Cypress Hill signed a record deal with Ruffhouse Records. Their self-titled first album was released in August 1991. The lead single was the double A-side "The Phuncky Feel One"/"How I Could Just Kill a Man" which received heavy airplay on urban and college radio. The other two singles released from the album were "Hand on the Pump" and "Latin Lingo", the latter of which combined English and Spanish lyrics. The success of these singles led to the album selling two million copies in the US alone. Cypress Hill contributed the song "Shoot 'Em Up" to the soundtrack of the movie Juice. The group made their first appearance at Lollapalooza on the side stage in 1992.

text: Black Sunday, the group's second album, debuted at number one on the Billboard 200 in 1993, recording the highest Soundscan for a rap group up until that time. Also, with their debut still in the charts, they became the first rap group to have two albums in the top 10 of the Billboard 200 at the same time. With "Insane in the Brain" becoming a crossover hit, the album went triple platinum in the U.S. and sold about 3.25 million copies.

text: The band headlined the Soul Assassins tour with House of Pain and Funkdoobiest as support, then performed on a college tour with Rage Against the Machine and Seven Year Bitch. In 1993, Cypress Hill also had two tracks on the Judgment Night soundtrack, teaming up with Pearl Jam (without singer Eddie Vedder) on the track "Real Thing" and Sonic Youth on "I Love You Mary Jane".

text: The group later played at Woodstock 94, introducing new member Eric Bobo, son of Willie Bobo and formerly a percussionist with the Beastie Boys. Rolling Stone magazine named the group as the best rap group in their music awards voted by critics and readers. Cypress Hill played at Lollapalooza for two successive years, topping the bill in 1995. They also appeared on the "Homerpalooza" episode of The Simpsons. Prior to Bobo joining the crew, Panchito "Ponch" Gomez sat in as a percussionist when not acting.

text: Their third album III: Temples of Boom was released in 1995, the album was certified Platinum by the RIAA.[5] Cypress Hill also contributed a track "I Wanna Get High" to the High Times sponsored Hempilation album to support NORML.

text: Continued career (1996–2002)[edit]

text: Sen Dog took a break from the band to form a Los Angeles-based rap rock band, SX-10.[6] Meanwhile, in 1996, Cypress Hill appeared on the first Smokin' Grooves tour, featuring Ziggy Marley, The Fugees, Busta Rhymes and A Tribe Called Quest. The band also released a nine track EP Unreleased and Revamped with rare mixes. In 1997, band members focused on their solo careers. Muggs released Soul Assassins: Chapter 1 featuring contributions from Dr. Dre, KRS-One, Wyclef Jean and Mobb Deep. B-Real appeared with Busta Rhymes, Coolio, LL Cool J and Method Man on "Hit Em High" from the multi-platinum Space Jam Soundtrack. He also appeared with RBX, Nas and KRS-One on "East Coast Killer, West Coast Killer" from Dr. Dre's Dr. Dre Presents the Aftermath album, and contributed to an album entitled The Psycho Realm with the band of the same name. Though the focus that year was not on group efforts, the band played Smokin' Grooves with George Clinton and Erykah Badu.

text: Cypress Hill released IV in 1998 which went gold in the US, on the backs of hit singles "Tequila Sunrise" and "Dr. Greenthumb". Sen Dog also released the Get Wood sampler as part of SX-10 on the label Flip. In 1999, Cypress Hill helped with the PC crime video game Kingpin: Life of Crime. Three of the band's songs from the 1998 IV album were in the game ("16 Men Till There's No Men Left", "Checkmate" and "Lightning Strikes"). B-Real also did voice work for some of the game's characters. Also in 1999, the band released a greatest-hits album in Spanish, Los grandes éxitos en español. In 2000, Cypress Hill then fused genres with their fifth album, Skull & Bones, which was a two-disc album. The first disc, "Skull" was composed of rap tracks while "Bones" explored further the group's forays into rock. The album reached the Top 5 on the Billboard 200 and number 3 in Canada. The first single was "Rock Superstar" for rock radio and "Rap Superstar" for urban radio. Following the release of the album, Cypress Hill (along with MxPx) landed a slot opening for The Offspring on the Conspiracy of One tour. The band also released Live at the Fillmore, a concert disc recorded at the Fillmore (in San Francisco) in 2000. Cypress Hill continued their experimentation with rock on the Stoned Raiders album in 2001. However, its sales were a disappointment, as the disc did not even reach the top 50 of the US album charts. In 2001, the group appeared in the film How High.

text: Till Death Do Us Part (2003–07)[edit]

text: Cypress Hill recorded "Just Another Victim" for WWE as a theme song for Tazz. At the time, WWE was using original music for almost all of the wrestlers. The band released Till Death Do Us Part on March 23, 2004. The album saw the band experiment with reggae especially on the lead single "What's Your Number". The track features Tim Armstrong of Rancid on guitar and backup vocals. It is based on the classic song "The Guns of Brixton" on The Clash's London Calling and has proven to be a success on the modern rock charts. However, the album represented a further departure from the signature sound of their first four albums. The album also features appearances by Damian Marley, son of Bob Marley, Prodigy of Mobb Deep and producers the Alchemist and Fredwreck.

text: In 2004, the song "How I Could Just Kill A Man" was included in the popular video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas created by Rockstar Games, playing on West Coast hip hop radio station Radio Los Santos. In December 2005 a best of compilation album titled Greatest Hits From the Bong was released including nine hits from previous albums and two new tracks. The group's next album was tentatively scheduled for an early 2007 release. In the summer of 2006, B-Real appeared on Snoop Dogg's single "Vato", which was produced by Pharrell Williams.

text: In 2007 Cypress Hill toured with their full line up as a part of the Rock the Bells tour, held by Guerilla Union, B Simm, and headlined with Public Enemy, Wu-Tang Clan, Nas, and a reunited Rage Against the Machine.

text: Departure from Sony and Rise Up (2008–present)[edit]

text: On July 25, 2008, Cypress Hill performed at a benefit concert at the House of Blues Chicago, where a majority of the proceeds went to the Chicago Alliance to End Homelessness.[7]

text: In August 2009, a new song by Cypress Hill, titled "Get 'Em Up", was made available on iTunes. The song is featured on the Madden NFL 2010 video game.[8]

text: In November 2009, a new version of the Guns N' Roses classic "Paradise City" performed by Cypress Hill, Slash and Fergie was made available as a bonus track to Slash's single "Sahara" from Slash's solo album Slash.

text: Cypress Hill's eighth studio album Rise Up, features contributions from Everlast, Tom Morello, Daron Malakian, Pitbull, Marc Anthony and Mike Shinoda.[9] The album was released on Priority Records/EMI Entertainment, as the group was signed to the label by new Creative Chairman Snoop Dogg on January 15, 2010. The album was released on April 20, 2010.[10] The album's introduction single, "It Ain't Nothin'" was released as a free download from the group's official website. The song "Rise Up" was featured at WWE's pay-per-view, Elimination Chamber, as the official theme song for that event, and was released as the third single for the album, with "Armada Latina" being fourth. The song also appeared in the trailer of the movie The Green Hornet.

text: Cypress Hill commenced its Rise Up tour in Philadelphia on April 10, 2010. Julio G had replaced DJ Muggs for the tour. Muggs had been absent due to working on several other projects, including separate albums with B-Real and Sen Dog. The group was supposed to stop in Tucson, Arizona but canceled the show in protest of the recent immigration legislation. At the Rock en Seine festival in Paris on August 27, 2010 they said in an interview that they would wait and see what happens with the legislation before going back there.[11] Cypress Hill performed at the Reading and Leeds Festivals in 2010, on August 28 at Leeds and August 29 at Reading.

text: On June 5, 2012, Cypress Hill and dubstep artist Rusko released a collaborative EP entitled Cypress X Rusko. Also in 2012, Cypress Hill collaborated with Deadmau5 on his sixth studio album Album Title Goes Here, lending vocals on "Failbait".[12]

text: Style[edit]

text: Rapping[edit]

text: One of the band's most striking aspects is B-Real's exaggeratedly high-pitched nasal vocals.[4] In the book Check the Technique, B-Real describes his nasal style, saying his rapping voice is "high and annoying... the nasal style I have was just something that I developed... my more natural style wasn't so pleasing to DJ Muggs and Sen Dog's ears"[13] and talking about the nasal style in the book How to Rap, B-Real says, "you want to stand out from the others and just be distinct... when you got something that can separate you from everybody else, you gotta use it to your advantage."[2] In the film Art of Rap, B-Real credits the Beastie Boys as an influence when developing his rapping style. Sen Dog's voice is deeper, more violent and often shouted alongside the rapping; his vocals are often emphasized by adding another background/choir voice to say them. Sen Dog's style is in contrast to B-Real's, who says, "Sen's voice is so strong," and "it all blends together" when they are both on the same track.[13]

text: Both B-Real and Sen Dog started writing lyrics in both Spanish and English and B-Real was inspired to start writing raps from watching Sen Dog and Mellow Man Ace writing their lyrics,[13] and originally B-Real was going to just be the writer for the group rather than a rapper.[13] Their lyrics are noted for bringing a "cartoonish" approach to violence by Peter Shapiro and Allmusic.[4][14]

text: Production[edit]

text: The sound and groove of their music, produced by Muggs, has spooky sounds and stoned aesthetic; with its bass-heavy rhythms and odd sample loops ("Insane in the Brain" has a pitched-altered horse neigh looped in its chorus), it carries a psychedelic value, which lessened in the later albums.[4][14]

text: For using rock/metal instrumentation the band is sometimes classified as a rap rock/rap metal group.[4] The double album Skull & Bones consists of a pure rap album ("Skull") and an entire CD of rap/rock/nu metal songs ("Bones"). In the live album Live at The Fillmore some of the old classics are played in a rock/metal version, with Sen Dog's band SX-10 and Eric Bobo playing the rock instrument.

text: While the first album and Black Sunday follow a more minimalistic and funky sound, III (Temples of Boom) has a very dark, spooky atmosphere and heavy beats, sometimes approaching hardcore rap. IV introduced more diverse sounds on the beats while maintaining the hardcore edge. The first albums are mostly influenced by psychedelic music, but the band eventually got closer to modern rap as it is today while still experimenting with rock from time to time, like on "Skull and Bones" and "Stoned Raiders".

text: Discography[edit]

text:
Cypress Hill (1991)
Black Sunday (1993)
Cypress Hill III: Temples of Boom (1995)
Cypress Hill IV (1998)
Skull & Bones (2000)
Stoned Raiders (2001)
Till Death Do Us Part (2004)
Rise Up (2010)
Elephants on Acid (2018)[15]

text: Awards and nominations[edit]

text: Grammy Awards

text:
Year
Nominated work
Award
Result

1994
"Insane in the Brain"
Best Rap Performance by a Group or Duo
Nominated

1995
"I Ain't Goin' Out Like That"
Best Rap Performance by a Group or Duo
Nominated

1996
"Throw Your Set in the Air"
Best Rap Performance by a Group or Duo
Nominated

text: MTV Video Music Awards

text:
Year
Nominated work
Award
Result

1994
"Insane in the Brain"
Best Rap Video
Nominated

text: Members[edit]

text:
Current

Louis "B-Real" Freese – lead vocals (1988–present)
Lawrence "DJ Muggs" Muggerud – turntables, samples (1988–2004; 2014–present)
Senen "Sen Dog" Reyes – vocals (1988–present)
Eric "Bobo" Correa – drums, percussion (1993–present)

Former

Ulpiano "Mellow Man Ace" Reyes – vocals (1988)
Farid "Fredwreck" Nassar – turntables, samples (2004–07)