Oh, and this step taken by the Indian government is negligible to what the US government was going to impose: SOPA. Also, as of now, nothing is being censored in India. And no one, but the politicians, have any objections for the web content. We Indians enjoy and believe in freedom as much as other do. Trust me on that.

The thing is our politicians are crackpots when it comes to technology (infact, in most of the areas where they can't "earn" their share). The leading whiner, Kapil Sibal, claims that the content on web may hurt communal feelings. But, most of the people who are backward enough to getting hurt by such content don't use web at all. Those who use are tech-savvy enough to ignore such contents. One reason behind this step was that contents abusing the politicians of the ruling party (mainly, the party head Sonia Gandhi) arose in the social networking sites and search engines. So, the most logical solution for these guys is to block the content. Of course, we Indians know that it is totally retarded. And India is a democratic nation for a reason. If people think what the government is doing is wrong, they won't let that happen. Indian citizens rallied against government in mid-2011 to stop it from introducing a crippled anti-corruption law. I am confident that the sites won't be censored in India, not until there is democracy. The current government has anyways done enough harm to the country so as not to get elected again.

Yes. Google is the reason why Opera even exists. Thats totally known to me. They why not support it for its services too?

Yes. It charged money in the era where free browsers weren't quite around (till 2000), and Opera had to make money from somewhere. After that, it became free and started supporting ads; again, because they had to get some revenue - the current revenue system of making money through search engine (i.e., Google) wasn't there yet. The ads got removed after that. Internet Explorer was free then, obviously because of the backing of Microsoft. Firefox came into play around 2004 - same time around where Opera also became free. Opera had had its share of mistakes. But your argument is too old to be relevant. This said, I totally admit that Firefox and Chrome are totally brilliant browsers- so are the companies behind them.

Opera came to my mind because Google was worrying about the betterment of the web. As i wrote in my previous comment, a smaller market share should not be hindering this. As far as your skepticism about Opera is concerned, Opera have kept innovating web and browsers. They havent contributed anything but good to the web. On the other hand, Google recently has been launching features in their services that are Chrome-Only. I really doubt if that is good for the web.

I still would like to ask Google why they dont support Opera in their services if they are so concerned for the betterment of the web. Opera has been a prime contributor in the web and browser technologies. I dont doubt Google's motives, but there is this fact, too. I will hate it if a small market share is the only reason behind that.

Well..this bill is directly/indirectly going to affect the whole world as a significant number of internet companies are hosted in US. If they get blocked, the whole world dont get to see them.