BANGALORE: A proposed government move to regulate content on blogs has ignited a firestorm of protest from the blogging community which is accusing the government of restricting free speech and acting like the guardians of a police state.
At the heart of the issue is the Indian IT Act which was amended in 2008 to incorporate the much-needed changes to clarify the legal position of intermediaries or those who provide web-hosting services, internet service providers and online auction sites.
However, the term intermediaries, for some reason, was also broadened to include blogs, though they neither provide the same kind of services like the ISPs nor have large-scale commercial interests. The law stated that the government should clarify the rules under which the intermediaries should function and the list of prohibitions applicable to them.
The list was published sometime last month and comments were invited from members of the public, bloggers and other members of the intermediaries group. ?Intermediaries? include web hosting providers which would include companies like Amazon , cyber-cafes, payment sites like Paypal , online auction sites, internet service providers like BSNL , Airtel etc.
Blogs also fall in this category as networked service providers. The due diligence specifies that the intermediaries should not display, upload, modify or publish any information that is ?harmful?, ?threatening?, ?abusive?, ?harassing?, ?blasphemous?, ?objectionable?, ?defamatory?, ?vulgar?, ?obscene?, ?pornographic?, ?paedophilic?, ?libellous?, ?invasive of another?s privacy?, ?hateful?, ?disparaging?, ?racially , ethnically or otherwise objectionable, ?relating to money laundering or gambling?.
?It?s a fundamentally flawed exercise. One has to keep in mind the nuanced role of bloggers. The government needs to understand the power of the blogging community,? said Pavan Duggal , senior advocate, Supreme Court and cyber law expert. ?The blogosphere has to align themselves to the changes in the norm,? he said. ?But since the term ?intermediaries? is vaguely and loosely used, the bloggers are right when they express agitation,? he added.
A senior government official defended the government?s response. ?We are in the process of finalising it. We welcome positive feedback and constructive criticism. We might have made a mistake in understanding the public aspect. The public could have a different view point,? said a senior government official.
Bloggers fear that the government will use these omnibus terms to charge the writers with almost anything. On Twitter , online users expressed their anger and frustration in equal measure.
?We cannot let the government to play the judge, jury and the executioner in this. Our entire audience is Indian. If our site is blocked, we are gone. I am a small player, everything we have built goes away in one shot,? said Nikhil Pahwa, founder and editor of Medianama, a digital business news site.
The penalty under this law are of two kinds. Under the civil penalty, the intermediary could be sued for damage by compensation up to Rs 5 crore per contravention. The criminal penalty is imprisonment for three years to life imprisonment for the top management of the intermediary if it is a company. There are no exceptions to the due diligence.
The law can be a potential threat to online businesses. Players in this space believe that the guidelines are very broad and vague and there is no apparent recourse. ?Why is the draft obsessed with bloggers, I don?t know. The rules are so vast that they cause annoyance. Who defines that the content is objectionable?,? asks Shivam Vij who is a regular contributor to Kafila, a blog that comments on media and politics.
Blogs in India are slowly gaining traction. According to the Vizisense, an online audience measurement site, Indian blogs attracted traffic close to 31 million unique users in January.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/internet/bloggers-call-content-regulation-a-gag-on-freedom/articleshow/7659593.cms
what do members of this forum think ?
Bloggers call content regulation a gag on freedom
Bloggers call content regulation a gag on freedom
RRK;374826the intermediaries should not display, upload, modify or publish any information that is ‘harmful’, ‘threatening’, ‘abusive’, ‘harassing’, ‘blasphemous’, ‘objectionable’, ‘defamatory’, ‘vulgar’, ‘obscene’, ‘pornographic’, ‘paedophilic’, ‘libellous’, ‘invasive of another’s privacy’, ‘hateful’, ‘disparaging’, ‘racially , ethnically or otherwise objectionable, ‘relating to money laundering or gambling’.
[QUOTE]We cannot let the government to play the judge, jury and the executioner in this.
enough said!
Bloggers call content regulation a gag on freedom
Draft IT rules threaten web freedom
Norms Explicitly Target Bloggers, Far From Being Tech Neutral, Say Experts
Shilpa Phadnis & Pranav Nambiar | TNN
Bangalore: The draft rules proposed under the Information Technology Rules 2011 (due diligence observed by intermediaries guidelines) by the government could lead to unprecedented levels of online censorship. Intermediaries include telecommunications companies, internet service providers (ISPs) and blogging sites. Under the draft rules, intermediaries will have to notify users of their computer resource not to use, display, upload, publish, share or store a variety of ?objectionable? content.
This includes infringement of proprietary information, blasphemy or abuse, information that could harm minors, content that impersonates another person or discloses sensitive personal information etc. Sunil Abraham, executive director at the Centre for Internet and Society, said that these moves would have a chilling effect on internet freedom. For example Sec 3 (2)(a) states that any website with social media integrated into it and allows public to add content comes under the blanket surveillance regime. Sec 3 (h), which talks about impersonating another person, will potentially discourage cases like the fake IPL player who revealed rich information while keeping his real identity under wraps.
The draft rules use a standard set of rules across a variety of intermediaries including telecom service providers, blogging sites, online payment sites, e-mail service providers, and Web hosting companies. Abraham believes that the government is explicitly targeting bloggers as a community and the draft rules are far from being tech neutral. ?The government has come out with standard terms of use for due diligence. But you can?t treat a small blogger on par with others who have large-scale commercial interests,? he said.
According to the draft rules, an intermediary has to inform users that in case of non-compliance of its terms of use of the services and privacy policy, it has the right to immediately terminate the access rights of the users to its site. In case of infringement, the intermediary has to work with the user or owner of the information to remove access to the information.
Apar Gupta, partner in Accendo Law Partners, said intermediaries like blogs and search engines would have censorship powers. ?It will not directly impeach the freedom of speech and expression. But intermediaries have to comply with some certain standards such as notify users on compliance issues.?
Some also fear that certain terms are so vague that to stay on the right side of the law, intermediaries may remove thirdparty content that appears even slightly controversial. While some terms like obscenity have been defined by the Supreme Court, others like sensitive personal information are loosely defined and vague. Sajan Poovayya, managing partner of law firm Poovayya & Co, thinks Sec 3 (2)(a) deals only with proprietary information. ?It has been loosely worded as belonging to another person,? he says. But such loose wording is the big worry for many.
Under the current IT Act, an intermediary is not liable for any third-party information, or data hosted as long as he/she has observed due diligence as per the rules. But experts feel that the new rules will give rise to subjective interpretations, thus giving discretion to non-judicial authorities to decide whether the intermediary has observed due diligence or not.
The draft rules also add new provisions to give the government easier access to content from intermediaries. Intermediaries will be required to provide information to authorised government agencies for investigative, protective, cybersecurity or intelligence activity.
Norms Explicitly Target Bloggers, Far From Being Tech Neutral, Say Experts
Shilpa Phadnis & Pranav Nambiar | TNN
Bangalore: The draft rules proposed under the Information Technology Rules 2011 (due diligence observed by intermediaries guidelines) by the government could lead to unprecedented levels of online censorship. Intermediaries include telecommunications companies, internet service providers (ISPs) and blogging sites. Under the draft rules, intermediaries will have to notify users of their computer resource not to use, display, upload, publish, share or store a variety of ?objectionable? content.
This includes infringement of proprietary information, blasphemy or abuse, information that could harm minors, content that impersonates another person or discloses sensitive personal information etc. Sunil Abraham, executive director at the Centre for Internet and Society, said that these moves would have a chilling effect on internet freedom. For example Sec 3 (2)(a) states that any website with social media integrated into it and allows public to add content comes under the blanket surveillance regime. Sec 3 (h), which talks about impersonating another person, will potentially discourage cases like the fake IPL player who revealed rich information while keeping his real identity under wraps.
The draft rules use a standard set of rules across a variety of intermediaries including telecom service providers, blogging sites, online payment sites, e-mail service providers, and Web hosting companies. Abraham believes that the government is explicitly targeting bloggers as a community and the draft rules are far from being tech neutral. ?The government has come out with standard terms of use for due diligence. But you can?t treat a small blogger on par with others who have large-scale commercial interests,? he said.
According to the draft rules, an intermediary has to inform users that in case of non-compliance of its terms of use of the services and privacy policy, it has the right to immediately terminate the access rights of the users to its site. In case of infringement, the intermediary has to work with the user or owner of the information to remove access to the information.
Apar Gupta, partner in Accendo Law Partners, said intermediaries like blogs and search engines would have censorship powers. ?It will not directly impeach the freedom of speech and expression. But intermediaries have to comply with some certain standards such as notify users on compliance issues.?
Some also fear that certain terms are so vague that to stay on the right side of the law, intermediaries may remove thirdparty content that appears even slightly controversial. While some terms like obscenity have been defined by the Supreme Court, others like sensitive personal information are loosely defined and vague. Sajan Poovayya, managing partner of law firm Poovayya & Co, thinks Sec 3 (2)(a) deals only with proprietary information. ?It has been loosely worded as belonging to another person,? he says. But such loose wording is the big worry for many.
Under the current IT Act, an intermediary is not liable for any third-party information, or data hosted as long as he/she has observed due diligence as per the rules. But experts feel that the new rules will give rise to subjective interpretations, thus giving discretion to non-judicial authorities to decide whether the intermediary has observed due diligence or not.
The draft rules also add new provisions to give the government easier access to content from intermediaries. Intermediaries will be required to provide information to authorised government agencies for investigative, protective, cybersecurity or intelligence activity.
Bloggers call content regulation a gag on freedom
cyberabadi;375077If approved, What does post #1 and #3 mean for this forum? What is Ok and what is not Okay, to post!
As I read it, it is imposing rules on the intermediaries (under the guise of "due diligence observed by the intermediary". What is not clear is, what if the intermediary is outside India (e.g. wikileaks), but the user is in India? They will send notification to Wikileaks and if no response, they will ban Wikileaks in India?
Most of the rules, we already cover in our CoC:
The intermediary shall notify users of computer resource not to use,
display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, update, share or store any
information that : ?
(c) harm minors in any way;
(d) infringes any patent, trademark, copyright or other proprietary rights;
(e) violates any law for the time being in force;
(f) discloses sensitive personal information of other person or to which the
user does not have any right to;
(h) impersonate another person;
(i) contains software viruses or any other computer code, files or
programs designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any
computer resource;
Contentious ones are:
(a) belongs to another person; (what does this mean? I think this is to curb whistle blowers - not post telephone taps, etc? sure doesn't mean copyright.)
(b) is harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, blasphemous,
objectionable, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, pornographic,
paedophilic, libellous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or
racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable, disparaging, relating or
encouraging money laundering or gambling, or otherwise unlawful in
any manner whatever;
(j) threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India,
friendly relations with foreign states, or or public order or causes
incitement to the commission of any cognisable offence or prevents
investigation of any offence or is insulting any other nation.
The above are too broad.
So, adding "blasphemous" would mean that India is no different from its neighbor, who also has a blasphemy law. I guess Desi would have to curb his impious utterances. :))
Bloggers call content regulation a gag on freedom
Signs of an insecure nation and leaders.
Bloggers call content regulation a gag on freedom
#6,
b2b, thanks.
Do we need to amend any of COC ? or change the way we do business here ?
b2b, thanks.
Do we need to amend any of COC ? or change the way we do business here ?