Digital Natives Blog
The Supreme Court Judgment in Shreya Singhal and What It Does for Intermediary Liability in India?
Even as free speech advocates and users celebrate the Supreme Court of India's landmark judgment striking down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act of 2000, news that the Central government has begun work on drafting a new provision to replace the said section of the Act has been trickling in.
Three reasons why 66A verdict is momentous
Earlier this week, the fundamental right to freedom of expression posted a momentous victory. The nation's top court struck down the much-reviled Section 66A of the IT Act — which criminalized communications that are "grossly offensive", cause "annoyance", etc — as "unconstitutionally vague", "arbitrarily, excessively, and disproportionately" encumbering freedom of speech, and likely to have a "chilling effect" on legitimate speech.
What 66A Judgment Means For Free Speech Online
This week India's Supreme Court redefined the boundaries of freedom of speech on the internet. With the Court's decision in Shreya Singhal & Ors. v. Union of India, Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, has been struck down in entirety and is no longer good law.
India's Supreme Court Axes Online Censorship Law, But Challenges Remain
The Supreme Court of India took a remarkable step to protect free expression on March 24, 2015, striking down controversial section 66A of the IT Act that criminalized “grossly offensive” content online. In response to a public interest litigation filed by Indian law student Shreya Singhal, the court made this landmark judgement calling the section “vague”, “broad” and “unconstitutional”. Since Tuesday's announcement, the news has trended nationally on Twitter, with more than 50,000 tweets bearing the hashtags #Sec66A and #66A.
Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt
Much confusion has resulted from the Section 66A verdict. Some people are convinced that online speech is now without any reasonable restrictions under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution. This is completely false.
Historic day for freedom of speech and expression in India
In a petition that finds its origin in a simple status message on Facebook, Shreya Singhal vs Union of India marks a historic reinforcement of the freedom of speech and expression in India.
Internet censorship will continue in opaque fashion
A division bench of the Supreme Court has ruled on three sections of the Information Technology Act 2000 - Section 66A, Section 79 and Section 69A. The draconian Section 66A was originally meant to tackle spam and cyber-stalking but was used by the powerful elite to crack down on online dissent and criticism.
No more 66A!
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.
What Does Facebook's Transparency Report Tell Us About the Indian Government's Record on Free Expression & Privacy?
Given India's online population, the number of user data requests made by the Indian government aren't very high, but the number of content restriction requests are not only high on an absolute number, but even on a per-user basis.
Indian Netizens Criticize Online Censorship of ‘Jihadi’ Content
The article on online censorship by Subhashish Panigrahi was published in Global Voices on January 6, 2015.
Overview of the Constitutional Challenges to the IT Act
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.
Is India’s website-blocking law constitutional? – I. Law & procedure
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.
Good Intentions, Recalcitrant Text - I: Why India’s Proposal at the ITU is Troubling for Internet Freedoms
The UN's International Telecommunications Union (ITU) is hosting its Plenipotentiary Conference (PP-14) this year in South Korea. At PP-14, India introduced a new draft resolution on ITU's Role in Realising Secure Information Society. The Draft Resolution has grave implications for human rights and Internet governance. Geetha Hariharan explores.
Report on CIS' Workshop at the IGF:'An Evidence Based Framework for Intermediary Liability'
An evidence based framework for intermediary liability' was organised to present evidence and discuss ongoing research on the changing definition, function and responsibilities of intermediaries across jurisdictions.
GNI and IAMAI Launch Interactive Slideshow Exploring Impact of India's Internet Laws
The Global Network Initiative and the Internet and Mobile Association of India have come together to explain how India’s Internet and technology laws impact economic innovation and freedom of expression.
Free Speech and Surveillance
Gautam Bhatia examines the constitutionality of surveillance by the Indian state.
Facebook and its Aversion to Anonymous and Pseudonymous Speech
Jessamine Mathew explores Facebook's "real name" policy and its implications for the right to free speech.
An Evidence based Intermediary Liability Policy Framework: Workshop at IGF
CIS is organising a workshop at the Internet Governance Forum 2014. The workshop will be an opportunity to present and discuss ongoing research on the changing definition of intermediaries and their responsibilities across jurisdictions and technologies and contribute to a comprehensible framework for liability that is consistent with the capacity of the intermediary and with international human-rights standards.
Free Speech and Civil Defamation
Does defamation become a tool in powerful hands to suppress criticism? Gautam Bhatia examines the strict and unrealistic demands of defamation law, and concludes that defamation suits are a weapon to silence dissent and bad press.
FOEX Live: June 16-23, 2014
A weekly selection of news on online freedom of expression and digital technology from across India (and some parts of the world).
