IT Rules

MEITY blocks information requests citing national security and the requirement to maintain “strict confidentiality”. A Delhi high court case may help change practices around internet censorship in India. https://thewire.in/rights/dowry-calculator-censorship-information-india 

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) is empowered to issue directions for blocking access to information (including tweets, websites – anything available on the internet) under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

The procedure it follows to do this is detailed in ‘The Information Technology (Procedure and safeguards for blocking for access of information by public) Rules, 2009’ or the IT Blocking Rules, 2009.

Ever since billionaire Elon Musk took over Twitter last October, the company has increasingly acceded to government requests for censorship and surveillance. The company’s own data showed that it did not decline a single such request between October 2022 to April 2023, unlike before Musk’s acquisition.

“This lack of transparency also allows for the complete lack of accountability that exists in India’s blocking regime,” Tanmay Singh, Senior Litigation Counsel at digital rights advocacy group Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) told Decode.

by Saurav Das

15/06/2023

Fareed Zakaria: This should send chills down every American's spine https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZynsHe_vJY Apr 9, 2023 CNN host Fareed Zakaria explains why legislation proposed for a nationwide ban on TikTok is frighteningly "Orwellian."

Response on youtube: Tarso Werlang  Why does our government allow corporations to dig so deep into our personal data for their profit. Screw that. If we had comprehensive data protection, TikTok wouldn't be an issue. In fact, none of these companies would be an issue.

Grizzled Nerd To me part of the issue is the conflation between the US's lack of meaningful privacy legislation and a specific app, in this case TikTok, that's a risk due to the current geopolitical issues. There's lots of examples of effective privacy legislation out there (Europe's GDPR for example) that could be used as a starting point. The real issue is that the on sale of customer private information is a very lucrative business and US legislators consistently fail with the Ethics vs Money question.

Paul C I instintively thought that this sounded like collective paranoia, thank-you Fareed for explaining in detail something that my gut feeling was telling me was wrong. Group thinking and tribal behaviour based on no facts exists in all societies.

Michele Engel -articulate argument against banning the TikTok app in the U.S. I was unaware of the alternatives, in terms of national security and privacy issues, and ignorant of the political impact it would have on the free flow of information.

Caroline : US intel committee will never permit a comprehensive data privacy law. They would lose the best mass access spying tools they have ever had.
Elizabeth Lode You can tell there's a tension in the air - I smell fear and thus exaggerated reactions to others actions are starting to show on so many levels. Fearful humans are dangerous. What have we done and what will befall us now?

Stacey Gruver The issue with TikTok is the way in which the app is presented in China compared to the rest of the world. In China it is exclusively a educational / musical educational platform, there is not cute dances, tricks or any activity that does not support education and life skills. Especially in the United States it was designed to be addictive and waste young people’s time, instead of being constructive and educating themselves. It also was designed to create division not only between races, but generations. The final pice is it extrapolates massive amounts of data not only from your device, but any device that clicks onto your TikTok feed.

WhatsApp group admin can't be held vicariously liable for members' posts: Madras High Court https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/whatsapp-group-admin-cannot-vicariously-liable-posts-members-madras 27 Dec, 2021 
The Court reaffirmed the Bombay High Court’s view that the creator of a WhatsApp group cannot be expected to presume or have advance knowledge of the members’ criminal acts. “a group administrator cannot be held vicariously liable for an act of member of the group, who posts objectionable content, unless it is shown that there was common intention or pre-arranged plan acting in concert pursuant to such plan by such member of a Whatsapp group and the administrator.”

Governing Online Speech | The Media Rumble 2021 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oow5bE9UQ2M 
Nov 10, 2021

The Media Rumble 2021 session on 'Governing #OnlineSpeech' was moderated by Chitranshu Tewari, director, product and revenue, at Newslaundry. The panel comprised Marieteje Schaake, international policy director, Standford Cyber Policy Centre; Alex Kantrowitz, founder, Big Technology; Mishi Choudhary, legal director, Software Freedom Law Centre; and Julian Jaursch, project director, Stiftung Neue Verantwortung.

Discussing the recently introduced Information Technology (#Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021, the panel talked about #accountability for online platforms and online speech governance. It also delved into the issues of limiting regulations to an independent body, such as the Facebook oversight board, as opposed to government action.

Mishi and Julian also discussed the balkanization of online governance and whether the current legal framework on regulation requires a relook.

0:00 to 01:18 Introduction 01:18 to 04: 38 Big-tech skirting accountability via ‘Ethics’ and ‘Statement of Intent’ 04:38 to 11:13 Online platforms’ choice between engagement and safety 11:13 to 21:18 Regulation protectionism disguised as empowerment 21:18 to 26:21 Regulatory frameworks infringing on international freedom norms 26:21 to 33:00 Negative connotation attached to online regulation 33:00 to 36:05 Europe’s pioneering role in regulation 36:05 to 41:38 Efficacy of community standards in regulating online speech 41:38 to 44:53 Dangers of excluding government regulation 44:53 to 52:48 Relook at existing legal protection against user generated content 52:48 to 56:44 Balkanization of online speech governance and concluding remarks