Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.
Legal Services India

» Home
Saturday, December 21, 2024

NEW IT RULES; Compliance Issue Faced By Twitter

Posted in: Media laws
Wed, Jul 21, 21, 12:08, 3 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 5766
On February 25th new IT rules called the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 [the “Rules”] were notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology. The new ruled aimed to regulate and manage social media platforms and the content shared on it.

On February 25th new IT rules called the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 [the “Rules”] were notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology. The new ruled aimed to regulate and manage social media platforms and the content shared on it.

The establishment of a grievance redressal system was made mandatory for social media corporations as per the Rules. It also lays down provision where the government and authorities can order social media platforms to remove questionable content – which must be complied with within 32 hours. The Rules came into effect in May and platforms were granted till 26th May to comply with the Rules. Instances of non-compliance have already come forward.

On June 16th, an FIR was filed by the Government of Uttar Pradesh state against Twitter for its failure to flag a video of an incident depicted with communal colour without verifying the content and facts of the matter. Twitter’s Indian Managing Director Manish Maheshwari was booked after probe into the matter and has been asked to cooperate with the investigation.

Hours later the Technology Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad of India accused Twitter Inc. for non-compliance and deliberate defiance of the new Rules. The Minister stated that the social media giant is expected to follow the Indian laws irrespective of its own rules and guidelines. A warning was sent to Twitter had already been issued by the Union Government in early June for complying with the Rules.  

Twitter has saught and been granted exemptions for liability on the basis that the platform performs as merely an intermediary. Twitter will most likely lose the status of being an intermediary and will be treated as a publisher due to their failure of adhering to the laws. Overtime Twitter has issued statements that the company intends to comply and abide by all Indian laws. An interim Chief Compliance Officer was appointed by Twitter India and all reports were said to be shared with the IT Ministry.

On 18th June, Twitter appeared before a Parliamentary Panel chaired by Shashi Tharoor with the agenda of protecting rights on the social media platform at the request of the Ministry. The meeting with the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology went on for a long time.  

The tiff between Twitter and government regarding the new IT Rules is escalating in a social environment where the Rules were not welcomed by many. Several find the Rules going against the fundamental right of free speech of the citizens of the country.


Originally posted on www.kpalegal.com on 20th July 2021

Legal Services India

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
kpalegal
Member since Apr 29, 2020
Location: Gurugram
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
This paper is written by "Kajal Kukreja"who is a final year Law student of New Law College, Pune.
free press which has the power to hold Government, public authorities and other parts of the State - in other words, those who exercise power over citizens - to account it is the watchdog of the public interest, a guardian against corruption, incompetence, waste, hypocrisy and greed. lt is, to coin a phrase, the arsenal of democracy
Close connection between media and law
Media On Social Penetration
Arnab Ranjan Goswami v/s Maharashtra Chief Editor of Republic TV by staying the two FIRs filed by Mumbai police against him under Sections 153, 153A, 153B, 295A, 500, 504, 505(2), 506, 120B and 117 of the IPC over alleged communication of the incidents of Palghar lynching.
All India Idara-E-Tahafuz-E-Hussainiyat v/s Maharashtra order allowed only five persons with a videographer to carry Tazia, replica of the tomb of Husain who was the martyred grandson of Prophet Muhammad in processions during Muharram
The police forcibly shut off news cameras before barging into the residence of Mr Goswami and attacking and thrashing a reputed national TV news journalist. The police even went to levels of misbehaving with Mr Goswami's elderly parents, in-laws and assaulting his son.
Philip Mathew vs. Kerala the press has the right to publish a news item with its necessary comments and views. Such right cannot be defeated unless malafides writ large on its face and not concerning with a matter of public interest or public good.
Mr Ravindra vs Maharashtra allegations levelled against a police officer that he is involved in criminal activities and publishing news report regarding the same would not incite the force to act against the government (within the meaning of Section 3 of the Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1922).
Let me begin with a disclaimer: I have no affiliation with eminent and senior journalist MJ Akbar of any kind and I have never met him in person
Dr CS Dwarakanath v/s Karnataka when the entire nation is facing a medical emergency situation due to the spread of Covid-19, it is the responsibility of the editor and concerned officers of the newspaper
At the very inception, let me begin by saying that there has been a fierce controversy over the huge debate triggered on the moot question Should opinion polls be banned?
the job of editor is most prestigious and responsible one. There are huge responsibilities of the editor for every news published in the newspaper of which he/she is the editor.
Aditya Raj Kaul v/s Naeem Akhter quashed a defamation complaint filed by the senior leader of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Naeem Akhter against the Editor-in-Chief of Republic TV, Arnab Goswami
TVF Media Labs Pvt Ltd vs Delhi that the issue of enactment of appropriate law or guidelines to regulate content on social media and OTT platforms needs urgent attention.
Sri Protip Roy Basunia v/s West Bengal that merely being tagged in comments on the social media by any other person necessarily does not confer any liability or responsibility on the person being tagged.
S Ve Shekher v Al Gopalsamy has refused to quash a batch of criminal proceedings initiated against actor and BJP politician S Ve Shekher for his derogatory remarks that were directed against women journalists.
Rajat Sharma vs X Corp (Formerly Twitter) that journalist Rajat Sharma had abused and used foul language against Congress spokesperson - Ragini Nayak on live television. It would be material to note that in an ex parte interim order
Nipun Malhotra vs Sony Pictures Films India Private Ltd that was pronounced most recently on July 8, 2024 in the exercise of its civil appellate jurisdiction has issued a set of commendable guidelines to the visual media to ensure a dignified portrayal of persons with disabilities.
Dejo Kappan vs Deccan Herald that comments by the media declaring an accused guilty or innocent while a criminal case is still pending does not fall under protected free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.
Top