The Centre for Internet and Society

IT (Amendment) Act, 2008, 69 Rules: Draft and Final Version Comparison: by Jadine Lannon — published Apr 30, 2013 — last modified Apr 30, 2013 09:56 AM — filed under: Internet Governance, Intermediary Liability, Information Technology
Jadine Lannon has performed a clause-by-clause comparison of the Draft 69 Rules and official 69 Rules under Section 69B in order to better understand how the two are similar and how they differ. Very brief notes have been included on some changes we deemed to be important.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog
GNI and IAMAI Launch Interactive Slideshow Exploring Impact of India's Internet Laws: by Jyoti Panday — published Jul 17, 2014 — last modified Jul 17, 2014 12:01 PM — filed under: Censorship, Freedom of Speech and Expression, Internet Governance, Intermediary Liability, Chilling Effect, Information Technology
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.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog
Intermediary Liability in India: Chilling Effects on Free Expression on the Internet: by Rishabh Dara — published Apr 27, 2012 — last modified Dec 14, 2012 10:22 AM — filed under: Freedom of Speech and Expression, Public Accountability, Internet Governance, Research, Featured, Intermediary Liability, Censorship
The Centre for Internet & Society in partnership with Google India conducted the Google Policy Fellowship 2011. This was offered for the first time in Asia Pacific as well as in India. Rishabh Dara was selected as a Fellow and researched upon issues relating to freedom of expression. The results of the paper demonstrate that the ‘Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules 2011’ notified by the Government of India on April 11, 2011 have a chilling effect on free expression.
Located in Internet Governance
India limits social media after civil unrest: by Prasad Krishna — published Aug 23, 2012 — last modified Sep 04, 2012 11:59 AM — filed under: Social media, Freedom of Speech and Expression, Public Accountability, Internet Governance, Intermediary Liability, Censorship
Indian officials have gone too far in limiting text messages and pressuring local Internet firms as well as Twitter and others to block accounts, critics say.
Located in News & Media
Rebuttal of DIT's Misleading Statements on New Internet Rules: by Pranesh Prakash — published May 13, 2011 — last modified Jul 11, 2012 01:18 PM — filed under: Freedom of Speech and Expression, IT Act, Featured, Intermediary Liability
The press statement issued on May 11 by the Department of Information Technology (DIT) on the furore over the newly-issued rules on 'intermediary due diligence' is misleading and is, in places, plainly false. We are presenting a point-by-point rebuttal of the DIT's claims.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog
Killing the Internet Softly with Its Rules: by Pranesh Prakash — published May 25, 2011 — last modified Aug 20, 2011 12:51 PM — filed under: IT Act, Internet Governance, Intermediary Liability
While regulation of the Internet is a necessity, the Department of IT, through recent Rules under the IT Act, is guilty of over-regulation. This over-regulation is not only a bad idea, but is unconstitutional, and gravely endangers freedom of speech and privacy online.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog
CIS Para-wise Comments on Intermediary Due Diligence Rules, 2011: by Pranesh Prakash — published Feb 25, 2011 — last modified Jul 11, 2012 10:27 AM — filed under: Freedom of Speech and Expression, IT Act, Intermediary Liability
On February 7th 2011, the Department of Information Technology, MCIT published draft rules on its website (The Information Technology (Due diligence observed by intermediaries guidelines) Rules, 2011) in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 87(2)(zg), read with Section 79(2) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Comments were invited from the public before February 25th 2011. Accordingly, Privacy India and Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore have prepared the following para-wise comments for the Ministry’s consideration.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog
Comments on the Draft Rules under the Information Technology Act: by Pranesh Prakash — published Jul 28, 2009 — last modified Sep 21, 2011 06:13 AM — filed under: IT Act, Encryption, Intellectual Property Rights, Intermediary Liability, Publications, Censorship
The Centre for Internet and Society commissioned an advocate, Ananth Padmanabhan, to produce a comment on the Draft Rules that have been published by the government under the Information Technology Act. In his comments, Mr. Padmanabhan highlights the problems with each of the rules and presents specific recommendations on how they can be improved. These comments were sent to the Department of Information and Technology.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog
Primer on the New IT Act: by Pranesh Prakash — published Jul 29, 2009 — last modified Aug 02, 2011 07:41 AM — filed under: IT Act, Digital Governance, Public Accountability, Intermediary Liability, Censorship
With this draft information bulletin, we briefly discuss some of the problems with the Information Technology Act, and invite your comments.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog
Why should we care about takedown timeframes?: by Torsha Sarkar — published Apr 10, 2020 — last modified Apr 10, 2020 04:58 AM — filed under: Content takedown, Intermediary Liability, Chilling Effect
The issue of content takedown timeframe - the time period an intermediary is allotted to respond to a legal takedown order - has received considerably less attention in conversations about intermediary liability. This article examines the importance of framing an appropriate timeframe towards ensuring that speech online is not over-censored, and frames recommendations towards the same.
Located in Internet Governance / Blog

« Previous 10 items Next 4 items » 1 … 5 6 7 8 9

Search results

Offices

Follow our Works