-
Can Uber, Ola apps be blocked? Govt fighting cyber odds
-
by
Prasad Krishna
—
published
Jun 14, 2015
—
filed under:
Internet Governance,
Blocking,
Censorship
The Delhi government is trying to block taxi hailing apps like Uber and Ola Cabs, but is it really possible?
Located in
Internet Governance
/
News & Media
-
DeitY says 143 URLs have been Blocked in 2015; Procedure for Blocking Content Remains Opaque and in Urgent Need of Transparency Measures
-
by
Jyoti Panday
—
published
Apr 29, 2015
—
last modified
Apr 30, 2015 07:37 AM
—
filed under:
Censorship,
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
RTI,
Intermediary Liability,
Accountability,
Featured,
69A,
Internet Governance,
Chilling Effect,
Transparency,
Homepage,
Blocking
Across India on 30 December 2014, following an order issued by the Department of Telecom (DOT), Internet Service Providers (ISPs) blocked 32 websites including Vimeo, Dailymotion, GitHub and Pastebin.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Is India’s website-blocking law constitutional? – I. Law & procedure
-
by
Geetha Hariharan
—
published
Dec 11, 2014
—
last modified
Dec 11, 2014 11:02 AM
—
filed under:
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
IT Act,
Blocking
Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, along with its corresponding Rules, set out the procedure for blocking of websites in India. Over two posts, Geetha Hariharan examines the constitutional validity of Section 69A and the Blocking Rules.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
List of Blocked 'Escort Service' Websites
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Jun 15, 2016
—
filed under:
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
69A,
Blocking,
Censorship
Here is the full list of URLs that Indian ISPs were asked to block on Monday, June 13, 2016.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
No more 66A!
-
by
Geetha Hariharan
—
published
Mar 24, 2015
—
last modified
Mar 26, 2015 02:01 AM
—
filed under:
Censorship,
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
Homepage,
Intermediary Liability,
Featured,
Chilling Effect,
Section 66A,
Article 19(1)(a),
Blocking
In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has struck down Section 66A. Today was a great day for freedom of speech on the Internet! When Section 66A was in operation, if you made a statement that led to offence, you could be prosecuted. We are an offence-friendly nation, judging by media reports in the last year. It was a year of book-bans, website blocking and takedown requests. Facebook’s Transparency Report showed that next to the US, India made the most requests for information about user accounts. A complaint under Section 66A would be a ground for such requests.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Overview of the Constitutional Challenges to the IT Act
-
by
Pranesh Prakash
—
published
Dec 15, 2014
—
last modified
Dec 19, 2014 09:01 AM
—
filed under:
IT Act,
Court Case,
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
Intermediary Liability,
Constitutional Law,
Censorship,
Section 66A,
Article 19(1)(a),
Blocking
There are currently ten cases before the Supreme Court challenging various provisions of the Information Technology Act, the rules made under that, and other laws, that are being heard jointly. Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan who's arguing Anoop M.K. v. Union of India has put together this chart that helps you track what's being challenged in each case.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
Summary Report Internet Governance Forum 2015
-
by
Jyoti Panday
—
published
Nov 23, 2015
—
last modified
Nov 30, 2015 10:47 AM
—
filed under:
Access to Knowledge,
Big Data,
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
Encryption,
Internet Governance Forum,
Intermediary Liability,
Accountability,
Internet Governance,
Censorship,
Cyber Security,
Digital Governance,
Anonymity,
Civil Society,
Blocking
Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), India participated in the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) held at Poeta Ronaldo Cunha Lima Conference Center, Joao Pessoa in Brazil from 10 November 2015 to 13 November 2015. The theme of IGF 2015 was ‘Evolution of Internet Governance: Empowering Sustainable Development’. Sunil Abraham, Pranesh Prakash & Jyoti Panday from CIS actively engaged and made substantive contributions to several key issues affecting internet governance at the IGF 2015. The issue-wise detail of their engagement is set out below.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
The Legal Validity of Internet Bans: Part I
-
by
Geetha Hariharan and Padmini Baruah
—
published
Oct 08, 2015
—
last modified
Oct 08, 2015 11:18 AM
—
filed under:
Social Media,
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
Internet Access,
69A,
Section 144,
Article 19(1)(a),
Blocking
In recent months, there has been a spree of bans on access to Internet services in Indian states, for different reasons. The State governments have relied on Section 144, Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 to institute such bans. Despite a legal challenge, the Gujarat High Court found no infirmity in this exercise of power in a recent order. We argue that it is Section 69A of the Information Technology Act 2000, and the Website Blocking Rules, which set out the legal provision and procedure empowering the State to block access to the Internet (if at all it is necessary), and not Section 144, CrPC.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
-
The Legal Validity of Internet Bans: Part II
-
by
Geetha Hariharan and Padmini Baruah
—
published
Oct 08, 2015
—
filed under:
Social Media,
Freedom of Speech and Expression,
Internet Access,
69A,
Section 144,
Article 19(1)(a),
Blocking
In recent months, there has been a spree of bans on access to Internet services in Indian states, for different reasons. The State governments have relied on Section 144, Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 to institute such bans. Despite a legal challenge, the Gujarat High Court found no infirmity in this exercise of power in a recent order. We argue that it is Section 69A of the Information Technology Act 2000, and the Website Blocking Rules, which set out the legal provision and procedure empowering the State to block access to the Internet (if at all it is necessary), and not Section 144, CrPC.
Located in
Internet Governance
/
Blog
