internet censorship by ronak
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
1/23
By: Ronak Karanpuria
LL.M. 1st year I.D. No. 534
Under the guidance of S.B. N. Prakash
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
2/23
Done by:
Governments or by private organizations at
the behest of government or by regulators
Internet censorship:
Control or Suppression
publishing of, or accessto information on theInternet
Reason: Political, Social & Conflict reasons
Moral, Religious, Business reasons or Legal
consequences
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
3/23
The basic idea of the Internet - to be able to communicate and
connect with people all over the world and say whatever we want
to say. This basic right is now severely at stake
.by Sir Tim Berners-Lee
FREEDOM
Economic - Business - marketing tool for companies
Social - Relations - friends, relatives
Political - Fame - politician mass image
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
4/23
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
5/23
Partially Free
Information
Technology Act
(ITA)
Government
blocking requests
Watch out what
you say on the
Internet
Government Regulations on
Pornographic, offensivecontent, violent and etc.
Internet Police
Comments, Blog and
forums
Federal Laws
o Communications
Decency Acto Children's Internet
Protection Act
Censorship by
institutionso Schools
o Libraries
o Telecommunicatio
n Companies
o
Wikileaks
Peoples Republic of ChinaIndiaUSA
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
6/23
1999 Dawn website blocked after Kargil War website ofPakistani daily
newspaper Dawn was banned
2007 Orkut and Indian law enforcement agreement to track defamatory
content
2011 Websites like Typepad, Mobango, Clickatell, without warning to
prevent piracy of the film Singham.2012 434 sites like Buydomains.com, Fabulous.com etc are blocked as a
result of government or court orders, some have been blocked by ISP.
Delhi Court issues summons to Google, Facebook for objectionable
content.
File sharing sites Vimeo, Megaupload, Torrentz & other torrents sites etcwere banned
During Assam Violence around 300 specific URL including website
ofRashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and in addition, articles from Wikipedia, and
news reports of violence in Assam on the websites ofThe Times of India,
Firstpost, The Daily Telegraph and Al-jazeera were blocked.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn_(newspaper)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singham_(2011_film)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimeohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrentzhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrent_sitehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sanghhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Times_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Telegraphhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-jazeerahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-jazeerahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-jazeerahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-jazeerahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Telegraphhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Times_of_Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipediahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sanghhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sanghhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sanghhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sanghhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashtriya_Swayamsevak_Sanghhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrent_sitehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrentzhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimeohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singham_(2011_film)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn_(newspaper) -
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
7/23
Pornography
Social Networks
Wikipedia
Wikileaks
Political Blogs
YouTube
Nazi and Similar
Websites
Religious Websites
Google
Websites Associated
with Censorship
Circumvention
Most Commonly Targeted Websites:
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
8/23
Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-
In) constituted under IT act 2003 by executive order.
The task of oversight of the Indian cyberspace for
enhancing cyber protection, enabling security
compliance and assurance in Government and
critical sectors. CERT-IN is the agency that accepts and reviews
requests to block access to specific websites. No
review nor appeal.
CERT-IN act as the sole authority for issuing
blocking instructions to the Department ofTelecommunications (DOT)
In 2004, CERT-In ordered to block
http://hinduunity.org on the grounds that it
contained anti-Islamic material that could be
inflammatory
http://www.cert-in.org.in/http://www.cert-in.org.in/http://www.cert-in.org.in/http://www.cert-in.org.in/http://www.cert-in.org.in/http://www.cert-in.org.in/http://www.cert-in.org.in/ -
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
9/23
Section 69A IT Act, grants powers to the
Central Government to "issue directions for
blocking of public access to any information
through any computer resource".
Guidelines, per s.69A(2), "shall be such asmay be prescribed". It has to be ensured thatthey are prescribed first, before any powers of
censorship are granted to any body.
Any law that gives unguided discretion on an
administrative authority to exercise censorship
is unreasonable (In re Venugopal, AIR 1954
Mad 901).
Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because
society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable
http://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.htmlhttp://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.htmlhttp://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.htmlhttp://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.html -
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
10/23
Like Google, Facebook etc. and ISP responsible for the content their
users upload(Intermediary liability) Terms of service to remove content that is grossly harmful, harassing,
blasphemous, defamatory, obscene, hateful, racially or ethnically
objectionable, unlawful in any manner, etc.
When intermediary has the knowledge (either obtained on its own,or when it is informed by any person)that the content being hostedby the intermediary violates the Rules, it is required to initiate action for
removal of such content within 36 hours or to terminate the access of
the users.
Are phone operators responsible for "content" carried on their networks- or their CEOs arrested if someone made a terror threat over a phonecall? No, they were simply asked to help with the investigation - intowho made the call.
http://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.htmlhttp://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.htmlhttp://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.htmlhttp://spicyipindia.blogspot.in/2008/01/launch-of-indian-kanoon-shedding-light.html -
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
11/23
intermediary - Vague Definition there are differentclasses of intermediary which control the architecture of
the internet and the hardware which enables it to run.
So liabilities must necessarily vary with the specific type
of service that each provides.
Sube Singh v. State of Haryanathat the states failure to
support a classification on the touchstone ofreasonability, with the existence ofintelligible differentia
or the rational basis of achieving a stated object, will be
ground for it to be held arbitrary and unreasonable.
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
12/23
Three grounds of attack:
Rules made by government are ambiguous and undefined.
Publication of certain categories of content over internet as
mentioned in the Rules are not offences under any existing law.Article 19(1) of the Constitution guarantees the right to free speech
and expression. Article 19(2) this right may be restricted in the
interest of the States sovereignty, integrity, security and
friendly relations with other States, public order, morality,
decency, contempt of court, and for protection againstdefamation. Some of the categories of objectionable content underthe Rules may not meet the requirements of Article 19(2) and may
infringe the right to freedom of speech and expression.
2. Cybercaf owners:Cyber cafs are required to maintain a logcontaining personal details, such as address and photographs of the
users, and their internet usage. Provision to prevent or investigatecrime. Such provision could have negative implications on the right
to privacy and personal security of the user.
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
13/23
3. Privacy & Survellience: Sec- 69 of the new amended act, it ispossible for the policeto snoop through ones emails, phonecalls, texts and other personal communication over the Internet
without any warrant for the same from the magistrate.
The intermediary is no position to decide whether a painting of
women is obscene or not, since that requires judicial applicationof mind.
Restriction that does not provide the affected persons a right to be
heard is procedurally unreasonable (Virendra v. State of Punjab,AIR 1957 SC 896).
Q1. How intermediary can decide which content is harmfulorunlawful?
Q2. Executive function of government delegated to private agenciesis abuse of power? No review ? No Appeal?Q3. Principle of Natural justice is violated as the content uploaderis not given the opportunity to speak about its content?
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
14/23
Word grossly harmful,
harassing, disparaging, Not Legal Standards subjective
grossly offensive Vague Terms indicators ofor menacing, hateful, personal sensitivitiesBlasphemous, defamatory
Do Not Fit in A.19(2)
Void for Vagueness Doctrine. [SC 1994 SCC (3) 569]It is the basic principle of legal jurisprudence that anenactment is voidfor vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined. Vague lawsoffend several important values. It is insisted or emphasised that lawsshould give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity
to know what is prohibited. Vague laws may trap the innocent by notproviding fairwarning
Express Newspapers (Private) Ltd. v. Union of India - Limitations onthe exercise of the Article 19(1)(a) right which do not fall within Article
19(2) cannot be upheld.
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
15/23
Under Rule 3 (4) IT guidelines 2011:Intermediary Guidelines violate
the authors right to notice and consequently affect his/her right toprepare and present a defence at all. In Sec-79 - limited time within
which action must be takenintermediary will lost the immunity if noaction is taken - Guidelines presume and rule in favour of the
complainants and in favour of (private) censorship.
Union of India v. Tulsiram PatelSupreme Court held that the principleof natural justice required the satisfaction of the audi alteram partemrule, which consisted of several requirements, including the requirementthat a person against whose detriment an action is taken be informed of
the case against him and be afforded a full and fair opportunity torespond.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India: Supreme Court held that the absence ofdue notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond would vitiate any
holding to the rights holder's detriment.
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
16/23
1. Rule 3(3) ultra vires section 79 of the IT Act.Rule expressly prohibits the hosting, publication or initiation of transmission of
content while sec- 79 does not intend any prohibition.2. Rule 3(4) inconsistent with section 69BRule states Intermediaries to take steps to disable access to within 36 hoursof receiving a complaint while sec- 69B which lays down in detail, theprocedure to be followed to disable access to information. Sec- 69B isstatutory law, Rule 3(4), being mere delegated legislation
3. Rule 3(7) is ultra vires sections 69 and 69B, and falls outside thescope of section 79(2).
Rule 3(7) provides that intermediaries must comply with requests for
information or assistance when required to do so by appropriate authorities.
This provision has no relation to the contents of sec- 79(regulates
intermediaries liability forcontent) & not consistent with the rules under sec-69 and 69B.
4. Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Interception,Monitoring, and Decryption) Rules 2009
Permission must be obtained from the competent authority to access records
while Rule 3(7) makes intermediaries answerable to virtually any request fromany government agency.
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
17/23
Internet is inherently DEMOCRATIC, suspending internet is violate the democratic
principles
1. Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes
freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
2. Special Rapporteurs Report & UN Internet Freedom Resolution2012
Recognize the need for special efforts to be undertaken by states to preserve free
speech on the internet. The former document justifies censorship only in the
most limited circumstances and makes specific mention of the commercial
interests that may be implicated in delivering free speech
3. Article 19(1) of Constitution of India, 1950 All citizens shall have the right
(a) to freedom of speech and expression;
(c) to form associations or unions;
4. Article 21 of Constitution of India, 1950 No person shall be deprived of his
life or personal liberty expect according to the procedure established by law
http://www.udhr.org/UDHR/ART19.HTMhttp://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/index.htmhttp://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/index.htmhttp://www.udhr.org/UDHR/ART19.HTMhttp://www.udhr.org/UDHR/ART19.HTM -
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
18/23
Internet censorship affects everyone. Environmental activists, HIV
lobbyists, human rights supporters, bloggers with opinions
When information is controlled, censored or blocked there is no
transparency.
Free flow of information restricted.
Speed of internet will be restricted User-generated content be filtered: Thatwould slow down the global Internet to a crawl, with posts appearing after
days
Everyone has the right to express an opinion and to access information
without fear
That's freedom of opinion and freedom of expression. And it doesn't
matter whether you live in Australia or in China your rights are the same.
Human rights are not just ideas and concepts they affect the lives of
real people.
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
19/23
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
20/23
Is INDIA the Next CHINA?
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
21/23
Google on this matter has also said that:
"When content is legal and does not violate
our policies, we will not remove it just because
it is controversial, as we believe that people's
differing views, so long as they are legal,
should be respected and protected."
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
22/23
1. To what extent do you believeinformation should be free?
2. Will you obey the governments
regulation of not reporting some certain
news, or will you insist to reveal the truthto the public?
3. What do you think about it with regard to
the internet censorship and the influence
of social network such as Twitter andFacebook?
-
7/30/2019 Internet Censorship by Ronak
23/23
Thank [email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]