Section 79 and the IT Rules: Privatising censorship in India
Section 79 provides safe harbour to intermediaries provided their activities fall within the ambit laid out by the provision. In addition, as per section 79 intermediaries are also expected to adhere...
View ArticleSection 69A and the Blocking Rules: Allowing the Government to block content...
It was on section 69A and the Blocking Rules that the Government drew, for example, in the wake of the exodus from Bangalore of large numbers of Indians from the North East, in August 2012. The law...
View ArticleSections 67 and 67A: No nudity, please
The fact that our lawmakers felt two provisions are required to deal with such material is interesting. Where the offline world is concerned, the law only prohibits obscenity. Online, however, the...
View ArticleSection 66A: Do not send offensive messages
The law reads: 66A. Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc. Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device,— (a) any information...
View ArticleThe Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008
The main Indian act that addresses legal challenges specifically as they relate to the Internet is the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, or for short, the IT Act. We highlight the sections...
View ArticlePattaya Key Messages on the WSIS+10 Review: Voices from the Asia-Pacific region
From 3 to 5 September, a group of 38 people from 15 different countries participated in the Asian Regional Consultation on the WSIS+10 Review, co-oganised by the Internet Democracy Project. While the...
View ArticleOpportunism or glasnost? India’s embrace of multistakeholderism in Internet...
In June 2015, India made waves in the Internet governance world by finally formally announcing that it would support multistakeholderism. What received less attention is that the government at the same...
View ArticleImportance of a rights-based approach to development needs to be recognised:...
Until Friday 18 September, comments were invited on the UN Non-Paper for the WSIS+10 Review from UN member-states, observer states and all relevant stakeholders. The Internet Democracy Project...
View ArticleOpen letter to Facebook about its ‘real name’ policy
The Internet Democracy Project joined 74 other human rights, digital rights, LGBTQ, and women’s rights advocates to come together as a broad global coalition and send an open letter to Facebook...
View ArticleCharting a concrete path for the future of the Information Society: Our...
Comments were invited on the Zero-Draft for the WSIS+10 Review from UN member-states, observer states and all relevant stakeholders until 15th October 2015. The Internet Democracy Project submitted...
View ArticleComparing the WSIS10 Draft Outcome Document with the Joint Civil Society...
The draft outcome document for the WSIS+10 Review was recently made available, which will form the basis for textual negotiations during the informal consultations that are scheduled to take place in...
View ArticleJoint statement on WSIS+10: Calling for an open preparatory process
At the conclusion of the 10th Internet Governance Forum on 13 November 2015, a group of over 25 organizations came together to issue a joint statement on the WSIS+10 Review process. You can join the...
View ArticleWe stand with Moroccan free expression advocates
The Internet Democracy Project has joined the Global Voices community in a statement of support for seven Moroccan journalists and human rights defenders who will face trial on November 19, on charges...
View ArticlePutting people at the centre of the Information Society: Our comments on the...
Comments were invited on the recently released Draft Outcome Document for the WSIS+10 Review process from UN member states, observer states and all relevant stakeholders till the 17th of November 2015....
View ArticleFacebook responds to Nameless Coalition petition, but leaves a lot to be desired
On 5th October, a coalition of organizations and individuals, including the Internet Democracy Project, petitioned Facebook to bring attention to the harm that is being caused by its Authentic Identity...
View ArticleSection 79 and the IT Rules: Privatising censorship in India
Section 79 provides safe harbour to intermediaries provided their activities fall within the ambit laid out by the provision. In addition, as per section 79 intermediaries are also expected to adhere...
View ArticleSection 69A and the Blocking Rules: Allowing the Government to block content...
It was on section 69A and the Blocking Rules that the Government drew, for example, in the wake of the exodus from Bangalore of large numbers of Indians from the North East, in August 2012. The law...
View ArticleSections 67 and 67A: No nudity, please
The fact that our lawmakers felt two provisions are required to deal with such material is interesting. Where the offline world is concerned, the law only prohibits obscenity. Online, however, the...
View ArticleSection 66A: Do not send offensive messages
The law reads: 66A. Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc. Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device,— (a) any information...
View ArticleThe Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008
The main Indian act that addresses legal challenges specifically as they relate to the Internet is the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, or for short, the IT Act. We highlight the sections...
View Article