Latest news with #InformationTechnologyRules
Time of India
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
X vs govt: IT Rule 3(1)(d) is only to flag illegal content, solicitor general tells HC
Academy Empower your mind, elevate your skills The government on Thursday told the Karnataka High Court that it invokes Rule 3(1)(d) of Information Technology Rules to flag illegal content to online intermediaries, who can decide whether to take down the material or risk the matter going to platform X wants the rule to be declared unconstitutional, alleging that it has been misused to order content takedown orders to intermediaries like it.A notice under it only results in the government intimating a social media intermediary that a particular piece of content is illegal, said solicitor general Tushar Mehta , appearing for the government. The intermediary has the choice to continue hosting the content or face a competent court, he hearing will continue Friday. Mehta said that such notifications are intended to protect ordinary users from online fraud, phishing scams, fake booking websites and deceptive financial schemes.X (formerly Twitter) had in March approached the HC seeking to declare that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, 2000 does not authorise the government to issue information blocking orders to intermediaries, or social media platforms. It amended the petition this month to make an additional demand to scrap Rule 3(1)(d).Section 79(3)(b) provides for authorities to remove immunity from liability accorded to intermediaries if they failed to comply with orders to take down unlawful content. In conjunction with Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, it also allows them to issue takedown also defended the Sahyog portal before the court, calling the issue one of national importance affecting all intermediaries, not just Sahyog portal automates the process of sending takedown notices to solicitor general said search engine giant Google had removed fake sites for Somnath Temple and Kumbh Mela bookings after the government flagged those. Such interventions are not about curbing free speech but preventing digital harm, he said.'Freedom of speech doesn't arise in such frauds,' he said, adding that most intermediaries are business entities, and the government is obliged to ensure digital safety of its warned of the dangers of unregulated content and technology, citing examples of artificial intelligence-generated fake videos, smart TVs and smartphones acting as surveillance devices, and individuals being profiled through their digital behaviour. AI poses new threats that existing laws are ill-equipped to deal with, like the potential misuse of deepfakes involving public officials, he said.
Time of India
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Govt tells Delhi High Court, Twitter now in compliance with IT rules - The Economic Times Video
The government on Tuesday told the Delhi High Court that Twitter appears to be in compliance with the Information Technology Rules, 2021, having made appointments in all three key positions mandated under the rules.
Economic Times
06-07-2025
- Business
- Economic Times
X withholds public access to Reuters and Reuters World accounts in India
X, formerly Twitter, withheld public access to official handles of Reuters and Reuters World in India on Sunday morning despite the ministry of electronics and information technology (MeitY) saying there's no requirement from the Government of India to withhold the two handles were withheld in India by X 'in response to a legal demand,' said a notification on the platform. On May 9, X had withheld its own Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) account within India. This occurred hours after X, through this account, had tweeted on the night of May 8 that the Indian government had directed X to block over 8,000 accounts in India. Later, X unblocked the Global Government Affairs account. 'There is no requirement from the Government of India to withhold Reuters handle. We are continuously working with X to resolve the problem,' an official spokesperson for MeitY said in a statement.X and MeitY did not respond to ET's requests for comment on the reason for withholding these accounts in the Elon Musk-owned microblogging platform has sued the Indian government in the Karnataka High Court over previous blocking orders sent by the government under a section of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 without adequate safeguards. The final hearing in the case is scheduled July 8. X has made a plea to amend its petition filed in the Karnataka High Court four months ago, making an additional demand to scrap Rule 3(1)(d) of the Information Technology Rules that empowers government agencies to order intermediaries to remove content from their platforms. The original petition, filed in March, had sought the court to declare that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, 2000 does not authorise the government to issue information blocking orders to intermediaries, or social media platforms, like X. Section 79(3)(b) provides for authorities to remove immunity from liability accorded to intermediaries if they failed to comply with orders to take down unlawful content. In conjunction with Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, it also allows them to issue takedown orders.
Time of India
01-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Karnataka HC allows X to amend plea seeking scrapping of content takedown provision
Academy Empower your mind, elevate your skills Microblogging site X (formerly Twitter) has made a plea to amend its petition filed in the Karnataka High Court four months ago, making an additional demand to scrap Rule 3(1)(d) of the Information Technology Rules that empowers government agencies to order intermediaries to remove content from their original petition, filed in March, had sought the court to declare that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, 2000 does not authorise the government to issue information blocking orders to intermediaries, or social media platforms, like 79(3)(b) provides for authorities to remove immunity from liability accorded to intermediaries if they failed to comply with orders to take down unlawful content. In conjunction with Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, it also allows them to issue takedown Tuesday, senior counsel KG Raghavan, appearing for X, informed Justice M Nagaprasanna of the high court that he had filed a plea to amend the original petition. Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who represented the government, said he has filed objections based on the merits of the proposed amendment but has no objections in allowing the petition to be a written statement filed on June 30, the government opposed challenging the constitutionality of the rule at 'this late stage'.Justice Nagaprasanna allowed X to file its amended petition in two days and fixed July 8 for the final hearing.X is seeking the court to declare Rule 3(1)(d) unconstitutional for being ultra vires (exceeding the remit) of the IT Act, or at least read it down and to declare that it does not grant the state any blocking powers. It also wants the court to hold that the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre 's (I4C) Sahyog portal is ultra vires of the IT Act and/or is union home ministry had developed the Sahyog portal to automate the process of sending notices to intermediaries by the government or its its March petition, X also sought protection for not joining the Sahyog portal as well as not complying with the notices sent via the portal. It had also argued that the government could issue content takedown orders only under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000 and not Section 79(3)(b).
The Print
26-06-2025
- Politics
- The Print
Maharashtra govt floats tender for fact check unit to track ‘malicious, inaccurate' content
Brijesh Singh, principal secretary, DGIPR, told ThePrint: 'Every day, we treat media reports as feedback on governance. During his previous tenure, Chief Minister Fadnavis made our approach clear: 'either the media is right, or we are right. If they are right, we need to take note. If they are wrong, we should inform them of factual inaccuracies'. This unit serves exactly that purpose.' The unit will be set up under the state government's Directorate General of Information and Public Relations (DGIPR), and will use technological interventions to speedily screen all information concerning the state government and check its credibility across languages for any supposedly malicious or inaccurate content. Mumbai: The Devendra Fadnavis-led Mahayuti government in Maharashtra has floated a tender to set up a fact-check unit to track all content about the state government across traditional media as well as social and digital media platforms. 'It is not intended to have any chilling effect (on the public) or create the fears some people are expressing,' he added. Government departments routinely identify any alleged discrepancies in media reports and send rejoinders as and when required. Singh said the fact-check unit will make this exercise more thorough and faster, bringing in technological interventions. 'We lack the capability to handle the current volume of misinformation, and it requires significant technical capabilities. When altered photos claim a bridge has collapsed, or old images are used out of context, we need to respond promptly and accurately, pointing out, for instance, that an image is from 2016. This requires forensic capabilities, making technical expertise essential,' Singh said. According to the tender, which ThePrint has seen, the fact-check unit will have a dashboard that would offer detailed reports and alerts on any 'misinformation, disinformation and malinformation' detected. The dashboard, the tender states, should help government officials to quickly review the content that has been flagged, understand the scope of the issue and respond in a timely manner. The agency chosen to set up the unit will also conduct training sessions and workshops for officials from the DGIPR and other government departments on how to use the dashboard, and view and analyse reports. Also Read: Trump dismisses as 'fake news' CNN report saying US strikes didn't destroy Iranian nuclear sites 'Fact-check unit proposal legally vetted' The Bombay High Court had in September last year declared a 2023 amendment in the Centre's Information Technology Rules, as part of which the government planned to fact-check social media content, as 'unconstitutional'. The amended rules were to restrain social media 'intermediaries' from publishing content about the government which its own fact-check unit identified as fake. Multiple petitions from organisations such as the Editors Guild of India, News Broadcasters and Digital Association, Association of Indian Magazines as well as comedian Kunal Kamra had challenged the amendment, saying the rules infringe upon freedom of speech and expression. In a 2023 letter, the Editors Guild of India had said: 'While admittedly there is a problem of misinformation and fake news, especially in the online space, efforts to check such content have to be by independent bodies that are not under the sole purview of the government, lest they become tools to clamp down on voices of dissent.' In December last year, the Centre filed a special leave petition against the high court's decision in the Supreme Court. It is, however, yet to be admitted. According to Singh, however, the Maharashtra government has got the proposal for the DGIPR's fact-check unit legally vetted and it will not be in contravention of the court's orders. 'The central fact-check unit was ruled unconstitutional by courts in an earlier decision because it required platforms to take down content based on the unit's report. Our approach is fundamentally different: it is not binding. The state government lacks such enforcement powers. Since that ruling, PIB (Press Information Bureau) has continued fact-checking, as have many other states,' Singh said. What the tender says According to the tender document, the fact-checking unit is expected to track social and digital media platforms, websites, online news aggregators and blogs for the state government to identify and respond to 'instances of misinformation, disinformation and malinformation being published' in a timely manner. 'If someone posts false information—say, claiming a statue has been desecrated somewhere—the government has a responsibility to respond with accurate information. Our primary objectives are serving public interest and increasing transparency and trust,' Singh told ThePrint. The unit will be expected to validate and assess the credibility of content not just in English, but also in Hinglish (an informal blend of Hindi and English) as well as regional languages such as Hindi, Marathi, Kannada, Gujarati, Tamil, Telugu, Urdu, Malayalam, Punjabi and Bengali. The tender document states the agency setting up the fact-check unit should also provide a solution to conduct predictive analytics so that the government can identify potential outbreaks of alleged misinformation based on historical patterns and social media activity. 'Using AI, it must forecast which topics are likely to be misrepresented, manipulated, or misused, allowing government agencies to respond proactively and mitigate potential damage,' it says. Further, the agency selected to set up the fact-check unit will enable sorting the allegedly malicious content into categories based on why it is malicious—whether it is inflammatory, insulting, obscene, profane or adverse. It will be required to detect deepfakes as well as content using code language with a 'harmful intent without explicit terminology'. The agency's solution will also classify accounts allegedly using media manipulation tactics to gain social media traction, posts that make derogatory remarks about someone based on their identity, and content by entities lacking credibility or verifiable accuracy, among other things, the tender document states. (Edited by Nida Fatima Siddiqui) Also Read: India's Chief of Information War during Op Sindoor night was fact-checker Mohammed Zubair
