The Centre for Internet and Society
http://editors.cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 21 to 35.
Internet Rights and Wrongs
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/india-today-september-1-2016-pranesh-prakash-internet-rights-and-wrongs
<b>With a rise in PIL's for unwarranted censorship, do we need to step back and inspect if it's about time unreasonable trends are checked?</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The article was published in India Today on September 1, 2016. The original piece <a class="external-link" href="http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/internet-isp-websites-censorship/1/754038.html">can be read here</a>.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Over the last few weeks, there have been a number of cases of egregious censorship of websites in India. Many people started seeing notices that (incorrectly) gave an impression that they may end up in jail if they visited certain websites. However, these notices weren't an isolated phenomenon, nor one that is new. Worryingly, the higher judiciary has been drawn into these questionable moves to block websites as well.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Since 2011, numerous torrent search engines and communities have been blocked by Indian internet service providers (ISPs). Torrent search engines provide the same functionality for torrents that Google provides for websites. Are copyright infringing materials indexed and made searchable by Google? Yes. Do we shut down Google for this reason? No. However, that is precisely what private entertainment companies have done over the past five years in India. Companies hired by the producers of Tamil movies Singham and 3 managed to get video-sharing websites like Vimeo, Dailymotion and numerous torrent search engines blocked even before the movies released, without showing even a single case of copyright infringement existed on any of them. During the FIFA World Cup, Sony even managed to get Google Docs blocked. In some cases, these entertainment companies have abused 'John Doe' orders (generic orders that allow copyright enforcement against unnamed persons) and have asked ISPs to block websites. The ISPs, instead of ignoring such requests as instances of private censorship, have also complied. In other cases (like Sony's FIFA World Cup case), courts have ordered ISPs to block hundreds of websites without any copyright infringement proven against them. High court judges haven't even developed a coherent theory on whether or how Indian law allows them to block websites for alleged copyright infringement. Still they have gone ahead and blocked.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In 2012, hackers got into Reliance Communications servers and released a list of websites blocked by them. The list contained multiple links that sought to connect Satish Seth-a group MD in Reliance ADA Group-to the 2G scam: a clear case of secretive private censorship by RCom. Further, visiting some of the YouTube links which pertained to Satish Seth showed that they had been removed by YouTube due to dubious copyright infringement complaints filed by Reliance BIG Entertainment. Did the department of telecom, whose licences forbid ISPs from engaging in private censorship, take any action against RCom? No. Earlier this year, Tata Sky filed a complaint against YouTube in the Delhi High Court, noting that there were videos on it that taught people how to tweak their set-top boxes to get around the technological locks that Tata Sky had placed. The Delhi HC ordered YouTube "not to host content that violates any law for the time being in force", presuming that the videos in question did in fact violate Indian law. They cite two sections: Section 65A of the Copyright Act and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act. The first explicitly allows a user to break technological locks of the kind that Tata Sky has placed for dozens of reasons (and allows a person to teach others how to engage in such breaking), whereas the second requires finding of "dishonesty" or "fraud" along with "damage to a computer system, etc", and an intention to violate the law-none of which were found. The court effectively blocked videos on YouTube without any finding of illegality, thus once again siding with censorial corporations.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In 2013, Indore-based lawyer Kamlesh Vaswani filed a PIL in the Supreme Court calling for the government to undertake proactive blocking of all online pornography. Normally, a PIL is only admittable under Article 32 of the Constitution, on the basis of a violation of a fundamental right (which are listed in Part III of our Constitution). Vaswani's petition-which I have had the misfortune of having read carefully-does not at any point complain that the state is violating a fundamental right by not blocking pornography. Yet the petition wants to curb the fundamental right to freedom of expression, since the government is by no means in a position to determine what constitutes illegal pornography and what doesn't.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The larger problem extends to the now-discredited censor board (headed by the notorious Pahlaj Nihalani), as also the self-censorship practised on TV by the private Indian Broadcasters Federation (which even bleeps out words and phrases like 'Jesus', 'period', 'breast cancer' and 'beef'). 'Swachh Bharat' should not mean sanitising all media to be unobjectionable to the person with the lowest outrage threshold. So who will file a PIL against excessive censorship?</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/india-today-september-1-2016-pranesh-prakash-internet-rights-and-wrongs'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/india-today-september-1-2016-pranesh-prakash-internet-rights-and-wrongs</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshFreedom of Speech and ExpressionIT ActInternet GovernanceCensorship2016-09-22T23:36:14ZBlog EntryWhy Geospatial Bill is draconian and how it will hurt startups
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/financial-express-prabhu-mallikarjunan-june-13-2016-why-geospatial-bill-is-draconian-and-how-it-will-hurt-startups
<b>Last week, the Indian government rejected Google’s plans to map Indian cities, tourist spots and mountain ranges, using the 360-degree panoramic Google Street View feature.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The article was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.financialexpress.com/article/economy/why-geospatial-bill-is-draconian-and-how-it-will-hurt-startups/282623/">published in Indian Express</a> on June 13, 2016</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Last week, the Indian government rejected <a href="http://www.financialexpress.com/tag/google/">Google</a>’s plans to map Indian cities, tourist spots and mountain ranges, using the 360-degree panoramic Google Street View feature. The government officials cited “national security” as a reason for not granting permission to Google. It is expected that the Google’s Street View permission would be relooked at, once the draft Geospatial Information Regulation Bill, 2016, is enforced as law. Many however feel that this draft bill is draconian and will have serious repercussions on the startup ecosystem.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Geospatial Bill seeks to make creating, accessing and distribution or sharing of map related information, illegal and that every company will have to take prior permission and license from the government for the same. Wayback in 2011, Google had announced the introduction of Street View for Bangalore, on Google Maps. But the project ran into trouble with Bangalore Police stopping Street View cars from plying in the city, citing security reasons.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Google Street View, launched in 2007, is popular in San Francisco, Las Vegas, Denver, New York and Miami, which allows users to navigate virtual streets from photographs gathered from directional cameras on special vehicles. While the service has been hugely successful it has caused problems of privacy in some countries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In 2010 almost 250,000 Germans told Google to blur pictures of their homes on the Street View service, while Czech government also banned Google from taking any new photos for the service. In Switzerland, the matter went to the court and it was accepted that Google would be obliged to pixelate 99% of images to blur faces, vehicle registrations and that it would not be filming certain sensitive places such as schools, prisons and shelter homes.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This adds to the list of recent controversies on Google Earth, and the draft Geospatial Information Regulation Bill, on adoption of mapping technology in India. Commenting on the development, Sumandro Chattapadhyay, research director at the Centre for Internet and Society said, the key country where the Google Street View faced legal challenge, and was fined too, is Germany. This legal challenge, however, was not based on the concern for national security but on that for the privacy of the citizens. However, it was eventually allowed to roll out Street View in Germany provided that it asks for consent from the house owners before images of any house.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“One of the crucial concerns with the draft Geospatial Information Regulation Bill remains its vast scope of application. Not only initiatives like Google Street View may be regulated under it (for capturing geo-referenced imagery from the street level) but absolutely any mobile application that requires the user’s geo-location (either automatically detected, or manually entered by the user) would be within the purview of this Bill. This evidently creates a great pressure upon the entire ICT-enable product and service sector in India,” Chattapadhyay added.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This would mean that, any company, particularly the new age startups, those in the food tech, fintech and e-commerce space, which uses geo-location to identify the customer location to either deliver goods, food products, or the likes of Ola and Uber which uses maps to pickup and drop customers, will have to obtain license from the government.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Raman Shukla, director—strategy and product, Medikoe, said, “At Medikoe we are helping users to locate the nearest healthcare service provider with the available technologies. Google Maps is one of key feature our company banks on. Though we understand the country’s security concerns, the draft bill, if implemented, would be a violation of independent internet. We believe that a much better solution can be identified to solve security concerns.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Venu Kondur, founder of LOBB, the online truck booking platform said, “Geostatial data is a very important data for our business. Customers booking truck through LOBB platform get real-time track & trace facility. Our customers rely heavily on this data for their day-day activity. Startups like us depend largely on maps data for real-time tracking of consignment. Lot of our business intelligence data is drawn out of it.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In case, if the draft gets implemented, many startups will be forced to change the business model and while it will also increase the product delivery time. A group of 15 volunteers created a SaveTheMap.in portal to educate the readers about the draft bill and also give complete information on how the bill have an impact on the citizen and users of certain application. Sajjad Anwar one of the volunteer, said, through the portal about 1700 mails have been sent to the ministry of home affairs airing their view on why they do not support the draft Bill.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Comparing with other countries, Chattapadhyay further said, “At first, other countries deal with the question of display of security establishments in publicly available maps through direct interactions with large mapping companies, and does not turn this into a financial and political burden for the entire economy. Secondly, it is the concern about privacy of the citizens that should frame the Indian government’s response to products and services like Google Street View, and not concerns regarding national security.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>What the draft bill says</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">No person shall, in any manner, make use of, disseminate, publish or distribute any geospatial information of India, outside India, without prior permission from the security vetting authority under the Central government.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Penalty</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Whoever acquires any geospatial information of India in contravention to the rules, shall be punished with a fine ranging from Rs 1 crore to Rs 100 crore and /or imprisonment for a period upto seven years.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Application for license</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Every person who has already acquired any geospatial imagery or data of any part of India either through space or aerial platforms such as satellite, aircrafts, airships, balloons, unmanned aerial vehicles or terrestrial vehicles shall within one year from the commencement of this Act, make an application along with requisite fees to the security vetting authority.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/financial-express-prabhu-mallikarjunan-june-13-2016-why-geospatial-bill-is-draconian-and-how-it-will-hurt-startups'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/financial-express-prabhu-mallikarjunan-june-13-2016-why-geospatial-bill-is-draconian-and-how-it-will-hurt-startups</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceCensorship2016-07-02T04:57:35ZNews ItemHere is the entire list of 'escorts service' websites that the government has banned
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/india-today-june-16-2016-here-is-the-entire-list-of-escorts-service-websites-that-govt-has-banned
<b>Another day and another opaque order asking Indian service providers to block websites that allegedly offer or advertise escort services in India. In total, the government has ordered ban on 237 websites. But as it happens whenever the Indian government bans website, there has been no public communication about the same. </b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The article was <a class="external-link" href="http://indiatoday.intoday.in/technology/story/govt-blocks-239-indian-escorts-service-websites/1/692381.html">published in India Today</a> on June 16, 2016</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Also, it has not been explained what, if any, process was followed before these websites were banned and what norms were applied for the order that the internet service providers have received.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>However, now Centre for Internet and Society has caught hold of the list of the websites that have been banned. Here is what <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/list-of-blocked-escort-service-websites" target="_blank">the organisation says,</a> "Unfortunately, the government does not make available publicly the list of websites they have ordered ISPs to block. Given that knowledge of what is censored by the government is crucial in a democracy, we are publishing the entire list of blocked websites." </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>As for the websites and URLs here they are:</span></p>
<ul>
<li><span>www.sterlingbioscience.com</span></li>
<li><span>rawpoint.biz</span></li>
<li><span>www.onemillionbabes.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaihotcollection.in</span></li>
<li><span>simranoberoi.in</span></li>
<li><span>rubinakapoor.biz</span></li>
<li><span>talita.biz</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescortsagency.net</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaifunclubs.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.alishajain.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.ankitatalwar.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>https://www.jennyarora.ind.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.riya-kapoor.com</span></li>
<li><span>shneha.in</span></li>
<li><span>missinimi.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiglamour.in</span></li>
<li><span>kalyn.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.saumyagiri.co.in/city/mumbai/</span></li>
<li><span>bookerotic.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.divyamalik.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.suhanisharma.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.ruhi.biz</span></li>
<li><span>umbaiqueens.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.aliyaghosh.com</span></li>
<li><span>priyasen.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.highprofilemumbaiescorts.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>charmingmumbai.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.poojamehata.in</span></li>
<li><span>kiiran.in/</span></li>
<li><span>mansikher.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.newmumbaiescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaifunclubs.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.punarbas.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.discreetbabes.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.alisharoy.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.arpitarai.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.nidhipatel.in</span></li>
<li><span>navimumbailescort.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.zoyaescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.juhioberoi.in</span></li>
<li><span>shoniya.in</span></li>
<li><span>panchibora.in</span></li>
<li><span>rehu.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.nehaanand.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.aditiray.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.rakhibajaj.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.alianoidaescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.sobiya.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.alishaparul.in</span></li>
<li><span>mumbai-escorts.leathercurrency.com</span></li>
<li><span>ankita-ahuja.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.yamika.in</span></li>
<li><span>mumbailescort.co</span></li>
<li><span>www.ranjika.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.aditiray.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.alinamumbailescort.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.sonikaa.com/services/</span></li>
<li><span>riyamodel.in</span></li>
<li><span>soonam.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.sejalthakkar.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.yomika-tandon.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.asika.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.siyasharma.org/</span></li>
<li><span>www.rubikamathur.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescortslady.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.sexyshe.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.indepandentescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.saanvichopra.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.goswamipatel.in</span></li>
<li><span>ojaloberoi.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.naincy.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.sonyamehra.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.pinkgrapes.in</span></li>
<li><span>anjalitomar.in/</span></li>
<li><span>www.nishakohli.com/</span></li>
<li><span>sagentia.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>mumbai.vivastreet.co.in/escort+mumbai</span></li>
<li><span>www.deseescortgirls.in</span></li>
<li><span>guides.wonobo.com/mumbai/mumbai-escorts-service/.4299</span></li>
<li><span>jasmineescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.shalinisethi.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.highclassmumbailescort.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.vipescortsinmumbai.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescorts69.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>monikabas.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.riyasehgal.com</span></li>
<li><span>onlycelebrity.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.greatmumbaiescorts.com/escort-service-mumbai.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.aishamumbailescort.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.jennydsouzaescort.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.desifun.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.siyaescort.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>masti-escort.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.sofya.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiwali.in/navi-mumbai-escort-service.php</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiwali.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.calldaina.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescortsservice.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.escortsgirlsinmumbai.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.passionmumbai.escorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.nehakapoor.in</span></li>
<li><span>meerakapoor.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.dianamumbaiescorts.net .in</span></li>
<li><span>www.allmumbailescort.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.rakhiarora.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.ritikasingh.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.rekhapatil.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaidolls.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.piapandey.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaicuteescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescortssevice.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.onlycelebrity.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.meetescortservice.com</span></li>
<li><span>onlyoneescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>simirai.org</span></li>
<li><span>www.riyamumbaiescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.neharana.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaihiprofilegirls.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.sexyescortsmumbai.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.sexymumbai.escorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.four-seasons-escort.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescortsgirl.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.vdreamescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.passionatemumbaiescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.payalmalhotra.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.shrutisinha.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.juliemumbaiescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.indiasexservices.com/mumbai.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbai-escorts.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.aliyamumbaiescorts.net.in</span></li>
<li><span>shivaniarora.co.in/escort-service-mumbai.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.pinkisingh.com</span></li>
<li><span>soyam.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.arpitaray.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.localescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.jennifermumbaiescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.yanaroy.com</span></li>
<li><span>escorts18.in/mumbai-escorts.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.tinamumbaiescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaijannatescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.deepikaroy.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.nancy.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.pearlpatel.in</span></li>
<li><span>30minsmumbaiescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.datinghopes.com</span></li>
<li><span>https://www.riyaroy.com/services.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.sonalikajain.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.zainakapoor.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>kavyajain.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.kinnu.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>exmumbai.in/</span></li>
<li><span>www.mansimathur.in/pinkyagarwal</span></li>
<li><span>exmumbai.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mansimathur.in/pinkyagarwal</span></li>
<li><span>www.devikabatra.in</span></li>
<li><span>katlin.in</span></li>
<li><span>riyaverma.in</span></li>
<li><span>escortsinindia.co/</span></li>
<li><span>www.snehamumbaiescorts.in</span></li>
<li><span>shimi.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescortsforu.com/about</span></li>
<li><span>www.chetnagaur.co.in/chetna-gaur.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.escortspoint.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.rupalikakkar.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.hemangisinha.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>1escorts.in/location/mumbai.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.salini.in/navi-mumbai-independent-escort-service.php</span></li>
<li><span>www.salini.in/navi-mumbai-independent-escort-service.php</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaibella.in</span></li>
<li><span>mohitescortservicesmumbai.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.anchu.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.aliyaroy.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>jaanu.co.in/mumbai-escorts-service-call-girls.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.andyverma.com</span></li>
<li><span>dreams-come-true.biz</span></li>
<li><span>feel-better.biz</span></li>
<li><span>jellyroll.biz</span></li>
<li><span>dreamgirlmumbai.com</span></li>
<li><span>role-play.biz</span></li>
<li><span>mansi-mathur.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.zarinmumbaiescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>mymumbai.escortss.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.goldentouchescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaipassion.biz</span></li>
<li><span>ishitamalhotra.com</span></li>
<li><span>happy-ending.biz</span></li>
<li><span>juicylips.biz</span></li>
<li><span>www.escortsmumbai.name</span></li>
<li><span>www.kirstygbasai.net</span></li>
<li><span>www.hiremumbaiescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.meeraescorts.com/mumbai-escorts.php</span></li>
<li><span>3-5-7star.biz</span></li>
<li><span>www.pranjaltiwari.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.richagupta.biz</span></li>
<li><span>way2heaven.biz</span></li>
<li><span>piya.co/</span></li>
<li><span>pinkflowers.info</span></li>
<li><span>www.beautifulmumbaiescorts.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.bestescortsinmumbai.com/charges-html</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescorts.me</span></li>
<li><span>www.tanikatondon.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.escortsinmumbai.biz</span></li>
<li><span>www.escortgirlmumbai.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaicallgrils.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.quickescort4u.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.mayamalhotra.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.legal-escort.com</span></li>
<li><span>escortsbaba.com/mumbai-escorts.html</span></li>
<li><span>rupa.biz</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescorts.agency/erotic-service-mumbai.html</span></li>
<li><span>www.escortscelebrity.com</span></li>
<li><span>www.independentescortservicemumbai.com/mumbai%20escort%20servi..</span></li>
<li><span>garimachopra.com</span></li>
<li><span>kajalgupta.biz</span></li>
<li><span>lipkiss.site</span></li>
<li><span>aanu.in</span></li>
<li><span>bombayescort.in</span></li>
<li><span>hotkiran.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>khushikapoor.in</span></li>
<li><span>joyapatel.in</span></li>
<li><span>rici.in</span></li>
<li><span>aaditi.in</span></li>
<li><span>andheriescorts.org.in</span></li>
<li><span>www.jiyapatel.in</span></li>
<li><span>spicymumbai.in</span></li>
<li><span>rimpyarora.in</span></li>
<li><span>lovemaking.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>riyadubey.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>escortservicesmumbai.in</span></li>
<li><span>mumbaiescorts.co.in</span></li>
<li><span>midnightprincess.in/</span></li>
<li><span>vashiescorts.co.in/</span></li>
<li><span>angee.in/</span></li>
<li><span>www.rozakhan.in/</span></li>
<li><span>www.mumbaiescortsvilla.in/</span></li>
<li><span>kylie.co.in/</span></li>
<li><span>escortservicemumbai.co.in</span></li>
</ul>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/india-today-june-16-2016-here-is-the-entire-list-of-escorts-service-websites-that-govt-has-banned'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/india-today-june-16-2016-here-is-the-entire-list-of-escorts-service-websites-that-govt-has-banned</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceCensorship2016-07-02T04:51:30ZNews ItemISPs start blocking escort websites following govt order
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/business-standard-moulishree-srivastava-june-14-2016-isps-start-blocking-escort-websites-following-govt-order
<b>DoT on Monday ordered blocking of 240 URLs; blocking of websites takes place under Section 69A of the IT Act, and Information Technology Rules.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span class="p-content"> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The article by Moulishree Srivastava <a class="external-link" href="http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/isps-start-blocking-escort-websites-following-govt-order-116061400376_1.html">was published in the Business Standard</a> on June 14, 2016.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have started blocking websites allegedly offering escort services after an order from the Department of Telecommunication (DoT).<br /> <br /> The DoT on Monday asked ISPs to immediately block around 240 such URLs (Uniform Resource Locator) offering escort services, to filter out obscene content on the internet. Speaking to Business Standard, Internet Service Providers Association of India’s (ISPAI) President Rajesh Chharia said the ISPs were in process of shutting down these websites. ISPAI represents 60 ISPs including Bharti Airtel, Tata Teleservices, Reliance Communication, Vodafone and Idea Cellular. <br /> <br /> “We received the order yesterday, and it entails a list of about 240 websites that the government wants us to block,” said Chharia. “CERT-In, which works under the Department of Electronics and Information Technology (Deity), advised the department on certain websites that it feels could be a national or social threat. Deity then reached out to DoT, which is our licensor. We are the licensee, and as per the licensing agreement, we have to comply with the order.”<br /> <br /> While declining to comment on whether this is the first such order the association had received this year, Chharia said, “Since last few years, we have been receiving orders to block websites which hosts content that may be a threat to social order or national security.” Blocking of websites takes place under Section 69A of the IT Act, and a 2009 secondary legislation called the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules (“Blocking Rules”).<br /> <br /> The rules empower the central government to direct any agency or intermediary to block access to information when satisfied that it is “necessary or expedient so to do” in the interest of the “sovereignty and integrity of India, defense of India, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognisable offence relating to above. Intermediaries failing to comply are punishable with fines and prison terms up to seven years.”<br /> <br /> In December 2014, around six months after the Modi-led BJP government came into power, the DoT ordered ISPs to block 32 websites, including Vimeo, Dailymotion, GitHub and Pastebin.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">According to an RTI filed by no-for-profit organisation Software Freedom Law Centre in March last year, Deity said 2341 URLs were blocked in 2014, adding that “barring few numbers, all URLs were blocked on the orders of the Court”.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Another RTI filed by Bangalore based think tank Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) found that 143 URLs were blocked in first three months of 2015 in order to comply with the directions of the competent courts. Later that year, the government attempted to block about 857 porn websites, but it had to revoke the order following the backlash online and offline.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The recent notice named a number of websites that need to be banned, including pinkysingh.com, jasmineescorts.com, onlyoneescorts.com, payalmalhotra.in, localescorts.in, pearlpatel.in, kavyajain.in, xmumbai.in, shimi.in and anchu.in.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">According to Freedom on the Net 2015 report by Freedom House, which termed India as a “partly free” country on the internet, there were 129 operational ISPs in India as of May 2015.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/business-standard-moulishree-srivastava-june-14-2016-isps-start-blocking-escort-websites-following-govt-order'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/business-standard-moulishree-srivastava-june-14-2016-isps-start-blocking-escort-websites-following-govt-order</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceCensorship2016-07-02T04:17:25ZNews ItemIndian experts doubt government ban on porn sites will be effective
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/zdnet-vl-srinivasan-june-20-2016-indian-experts-doubt-government-ban-on-porn-sites-will-be-effective
<b>The Indian government directed service providers to block 240 websites but doubts have surfaced over the legality of such an order.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.zdnet.com/article/indian-experts-doubt-government-ban-on-porn-sites-will-be-effective/">published in ZDNet</a> on June 20, 2016.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Last year, the Indian government identified more than 850 websites that provided escort services but action has been initiated only with respect to 240 such websites after a Mumbai court issued an order to ban them last week.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">These sites were banned under the provision of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 -- as their content relate to morality and decency as given in Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India -- on June 13 after a committee of experts in the Indian Home Ministry recommended action against them.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">But experts doubt whether the government can proscribe them in view of a lack of adequate legislation. Jaspreet Grewal, programme officer with the Centre for Internet and Society, said that though the websites offering escort services may potentially be in violation of the law, they cannot be banned under the existing provisions of the IT Act.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Even the government appears to be in a dilemma, as although it notified internet service providers to disable 857 websites on July 31, 2015, it modified the orders four days later, saying that the service providers were free "not to disable" any of the 857 sites if they did not have child pornographic content.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Following an uproar, with netizens lashing out at the government on the social media platforms such as Reddit and Twitter saying that it was trying to impose censorship and also curb freedom of expression, the government decided to rescind its July 31 directives.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>According to a report in Delhi-based English daily </span><em>Hindustan Times</em><span>, Indian Minister for Communication and Information Technology Ravi Shankar Prasad rejected that the present government was a Talibani government, as being said by some of the critics. "Our government supports free media, respects communication on social media, and has respected freedom of communication always," he said.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The minister, while making a statement in Parliament last month, admitted that it was a significant challenge to filter the sites with pornographic content as most of the pornographic sites were hosted outside the country, where viewing pornography is legal.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"These websites keep on changing the names, domain addresses, and hosting platforms from time to time, making it difficult to filter or block such websites using technical tools available in the market," he added.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The minister also said that the government was asking the service providers regularly to upgrade their infrastructure and technology to effectively address the shortcomings with regard to identifying and blocking encrypted websites. "The government is also in regular touch with social networking sites, having their offices in India, to disable objectionable contents at the source from their websites," he added.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">However, the government seems to be treading cautiously and an indication to this effect was given by a senior official in the Department of Electronics and Information Technology (DeitY). "Though a debate is taking place for a long time, the government is now taking a calibrated approach," DeitY Joint Secretary Rajiv Bansal said at an ICANN event held in Delhi on Thursday.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>He also felt that banning the websites was not a solution as new sites were sprouting to replace the blocked ones.</span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/zdnet-vl-srinivasan-june-20-2016-indian-experts-doubt-government-ban-on-porn-sites-will-be-effective'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/zdnet-vl-srinivasan-june-20-2016-indian-experts-doubt-government-ban-on-porn-sites-will-be-effective</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaInternet GovernanceCensorship2016-07-01T15:00:32ZNews ItemCreativity, Politics, and Internet Censorship
http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/creativity-politics-and-internet-censorship-20160525
<b>In collaboration with Karnataka for Kashmir, we organised a discussion on 'Creativity, Politics and Internet Censorship' on May 25, 2016. Mahum Shabir, a legal activist and artist, Mir Suhail, political cartoonist with Kashmir Reader and Rising Kashmir, and Habeel Iqbal, a lawyer who has worked with several justice groups in Kashmir, shared some of their work and experiences. This discussion was organised as part of Port of Kashmir 2016, a series of events bringing together a small collective of people using different modes of art and activism to address crucial challenges to free speech and democracy in the state. </b>
<p> </p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/MahumShabirHandwara.jpg" alt="null" />
<h6>Mahum Shabir talking about the Handwara case. Source: Swar Thounaojam.</h6>
<p> </p>
<p>The discussion began with Mahum Shabir giving an overview of the work at the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society, specifically on the Handwara case. She spoke of the role of the internet, and social media in particular, in perpetuating the gaze of the state, while also bringing up the larger question of how media propagates a certain way of looking at Kashmir, particularly women, marginalised groups and victims of violence. Internet blockades and media censorship pose several obstacles for the circulation of information, resulting in the need for surreptitious ways of communication as a necessary way to counter predominant narratives in the discourse around occupation. The implications of these for the rights of women in particular, the curbs on freedom at different levels, and the undercurrent of violence that is prevalent in everyday life, came up as significant questions.</p>
<p>Mir Suhail presented some of his cartoons, and shared some poignant personal experiences of growing up in a state under military occupation. His works reflect his concerns about a changing society, from understanding strife as an almost normalised state of existence, to now a phase of industrialization and control of resources. He spoke on the politics of exercising creative freedom in the present, and his attempt to encourage conversations on contemporary issues through his art. The role of technology in facilitating these conversations is as crucial as it is contentious, for it also brings up questions of surveillance and privacy;his art tries to navigate through some of these questions in different ways.</p>
<p>Habeel Iqbal, a lawyer who has worked on the Shopian and Handwara cases, spoke on some of the legal aspects of censorship and surveillance related issues in Kashmir, particularly in instances involving social media. He discussed some of the challenges faced by activists, social workers and political groups in working on certain cases, particularly in gathering and circulating information or in writing about sensitive issues. Self-censorship is often the only option for people working on these issues, as he elaborated through some personal experiences.</p>
<p>The discussion included questions on the possibilities opened up by privacy tools, such the use of encryption and to the extent to which they affect communication. Access to these technologies is a factor here; besides, transparency is also a goal for most human rights organisations working in the state. Social media, and social messaging apps in particular often function as an alternative to mainstream media as a means of communication, and it is interesting to see the questions it opens up for censorship. Examples of activism using not just the internet, but the network (through USBs and hard drives) were also discussed. The responses to such forms of activism, from across the world were interesting to engage with, as it tries to tackle predominant perceptions about the state. The economic aspects of different strategies of censorship and surveillance, through curfews and blockades and its broader implications for socio-economic development in the state were also discussed. The talk provided several insights into the problems and challenges to freedom of speech, the censorship of ideas, and its repercussions for creative freedom and politics in Kashmir.</p>
<p> </p>
<img src="https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cis-india/website/master/img/MirSuhailPostcards.jpg" alt="null" />
<h6>Postcards of cartoons by Mir Suhail. Source: Swar Thounaojam.</h6>
<p> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/creativity-politics-and-internet-censorship-20160525'>http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/creativity-politics-and-internet-censorship-20160525</a>
</p>
No publishersneha-ppResearchers at WorkPracticeArtCensorship2016-06-17T07:07:40ZBlog EntryList of Blocked 'Escort Service' Websites
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/list-of-blocked-escort-service-websites
<b>Here is the full list of URLs that Indian ISPs were asked to block on Monday, June 13, 2016.</b>
<p>On April 20, 2016, DNA carried a report on <a href="http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-pil-seeks-police-action-against-website-ads-on-escort-services-2204362">a PIL seeking action against advertisements for prostitution in newspapers and on websites</a>. That report noted that the Mumbai Police had obtained an order from a magistrates court to block 174 objectionable websites, and had sent a list to the "Group Coordinator (Cyber Laws)" within the Department of Electronics and IT. On June 13, 2016, some news agencies carried reports about <a href="http://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/govt-bans-240-websites-offering-escort-services-116061400561_1.html">the Ministry of Communications and IT having ordered ISPs to block 240 websites</a>.</p>
<p>As far as we know, the Mumbai Police has not proceeded against any of the people who run these websites, whose phone numbers are available, and whose names and addresses are also available in many cases through WHOIS queries on the domain names.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the government does not make available publicly the list of websites they have ordered ISPs to block. Given that knowledge of what is censored by the government is crucial in a democracy, we are publishing the entire list of blocked websites.</p>
<p>Those of these websites that use TLS (i.e., those with 'https'), still appear to be available on multiple Indian ISPs, and others can be accessed by using a proxy VPN from outside India or by using Tor.</p>
<p>Notes:</p>
<ul>
<li>The list circulated to ISPs has two sub-lists, numbered from 1-174 (but containing 175 entries, with a numbering mistake), and 1-64, for a total of 239 URLs.</li>
<li>4 URLs are repeated in the list ("www.salini.in/navi-mumbai-independent-escort-service.php", "exmumbai.in", "www.mansimathur.in/pinkyagarwal", "www.mumbaifunclubs.com")</li>
<li>For one website, both the domain name and a specific web page within it are listed (""www.mumbaiwali.in" and "www.mumbaiwali.in/navi-mumbai-escort-service.php")</li>
<li>One URL is incomplete (No. 214: "www.independentescortservicemumbai.com/mumbai%20escort%20servi..")</li>
<li>There are thus 235 unique URLs, targetting 234 websites and web pages.</li>
</ul>
<p><br />
<br />
<hr /></p>
<h2>Full List of Blocked URLs</h2>
<ol>
<li>www.sterlingbioscience.com</li>
<li>rawpoint.biz</li>
<li>www.onemillionbabes.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaihotcollection.in</li>
<li>simranoberoi.in</li>
<li>rubinakapoor.biz</li>
<li>talita.biz</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescortsagency.net</li>
<li>www.mumbaifunclubs.com</li>
<li>www.alishajain.co.in</li>
<li>www.ankitatalwar.co.in</li>
<li>https://www.jennyarora.ind.in</li>
<li>www.riya-kapoor.com</li>
<li>shneha.in</li>
<li>missinimi.in</li>
<li>www.mumbaiglamour.in</li>
<li>kalyn.in</li>
<li>www.saumyagiri.co.in/city/mumbai/</li>
<li>bookerotic.com</li>
<li>www.divyamalik.in</li>
<li>www.suhanisharma.co.in</li>
<li>www.ruhi.biz</li>
<li>umbaiqueens.in</li>
<li>www.aliyaghosh.com</li>
<li>priyasen.in</li>
<li>www.highprofilemumbaiescorts.co.in</li>
<li>charmingmumbai.com</li>
<li>www.poojamehata.in</li>
<li>kiiran.in/</li>
<li>mansikher.in</li>
<li>www.newmumbaiescorts.in</li>
<li>www.mumbaifunclubs.com</li>
<li>www.punarbas.in</li>
<li>www.discreetbabes.in</li>
<li>www.alisharoy.in</li>
<li>www.arpitarai.in</li>
<li>www.nidhipatel.in</li>
<li>navimumbailescort.com</li>
<li>www.zoyaescorts.com</li>
<li>www.juhioberoi.in</li>
<li>shoniya.in</li>
<li>panchibora.in</li>
<li>rehu.in</li>
<li>www.nehaanand.com</li>
<li>www.aditiray.co.in</li>
<li>www.rakhibajaj.in</li>
<li>www.alianoidaescorts.in</li>
<li>www.sobiya.in</li>
<li>www.alishaparul.in</li>
<li>mumbai-escorts.leathercurrency.com</li>
<li>ankita-ahuja.in</li>
<li>www.yamika.in</li>
<li>mumbailescort.co</li>
<li>www.ranjika.in</li>
<li>www.aditiray.com</li>
<li>www.alinamumbailescort.in</li>
<li>www.sonikaa.com/services/</li>
<li>riyamodel.in</li>
<li>mumbai-escorts.info</li>
<li>soonam.in</li>
<li>www.sejalthakkar.com</li>
<li>www.yomika-tandon.in</li>
<li>www.asika.in</li>
<li>www.siyasharma.org/</li>
<li>www.rubikamathur.in</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescortslady.com</li>
<li>www.sexyshe.in</li>
<li>www.indepandentescorts.com</li>
<li>www.saanvichopra.co.in</li>
<li>www.goswamipatel.in</li>
<li>ojaloberoi.in</li>
<li>www.naincy.in</li>
<li>www.sonyamehra.com</li>
<li>www.pinkgrapes.in</li>
<li>anjalitomar.in/</li>
<li>www.nishakohli.com/</li>
<li>sagentia.co.in</li>
<li>mumbai.vivastreet.co.in/escort+mumbai</li>
<li>www.deseescortgirls.in</li>
<li>guides.wonobo.com/mumbai/mumbai-escorts-service/.4299</li>
<li>jasmineescorts.com</li>
<li>www.shalinisethi.com</li>
<li>www.highclassmumbailescort.com</li>
<li>www.vipescortsinmumbai.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescorts69.co.in</li>
<li>monikabas.co.in</li>
<li>www.riyasehgal.com</li>
<li>onlycelebrity.in</li>
<li>www.greatmumbaiescorts.com/escort-service-mumbai.html</li>
<li>www.aishamumbailescort.com</li>
<li>www.jennydsouzaescort.com</li>
<li>www.desifun.in</li>
<li>www.siyaescort.co.in</li>
<li>masti—escort.in</li>
<li>www.sofya.in</li>
<li>www.mumbaiwali.in/navi-mumbai-escort-service.php</li>
<li>www.mumbaiwali.in</li>
<li>www.calldaina.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescortsservice.co.in</li>
<li>www.escortsgirlsinmumbai.com</li>
<li>www.passionmumbai.escorts.com</li>
<li>www.nehakapoor.in</li>
<li>meerakapoor.com</li>
<li>www.dianamumbaiescorts.net .in</li>
<li>www.allmumbailescort.in</li>
<li>www.rakhiarora.in</li>
<li>www.ritikasingh.com</li>
<li>www.rekhapatil.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaidolls.com</li>
<li>www.piapandey.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaicuteescorts.in</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescortssevice.com</li>
<li>www.onlycelebrity.com</li>
<li>www.meetescortservice.com</li>
<li>onlyoneescorts.com</li>
<li>simirai.org</li>
<li>www.riyamumbaiescorts.in</li>
<li>www.neharana.in</li>
<li>www.tanyaroy.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaihiprofilegirls.in</li>
<li>www.sexyescortsmumbai.in</li>
<li>www.sexymumbai.escorts.com</li>
<li>www.four-seasons—escort.in</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescortsgirl.com</li>
<li>www.vdreamescorts.com</li>
<li>www.passionatemumbaiescorts.in</li>
<li>www.payalmalhotra.in</li>
<li>www.shrutisinha.com</li>
<li>www.juliemumbaiescorts.com</li>
<li>www.indiasexservices.com/mumbai.html</li>
<li>www.mumbai-escorts.co.in</li>
<li>www.aliyamumbaiescorts.net.in</li>
<li>shivaniarora.co.in/escort–service-mumbai.html</li>
<li>www.pinkisingh.com</li>
<li>soyam.in</li>
<li>www.arpitaray.com</li>
<li>www.localescorts.in</li>
<li>www.jennifermumbaiescorts.com</li>
<li>www.yanaroy.com</li>
<li>escorts18.in/mumbai—escorts.html</li>
<li>www.tinamumbaiescorts.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaijannatescorts.com</li>
<li>www.deepikaroy.com</li>
<li>www.nancy.co.in</li>
<li>www.pearlpatel.in</li>
<li>30minsmumbaiescorts.in</li>
<li>www.datinghopes.com</li>
<li>https://www.riyaroy.com/services.html</li>
<li>www.sonalikajain.com</li>
<li>www.zainakapoor.co.in</li>
<li>kavyajain.in</li>
<li>www.kinnu.co.in</li>
<li>exmumbai.in/</li>
<li>www.mansimathur.in/pinkyagarwal</li>
<li>exmumbai.in</li>
<li>www.mansimathur.in/pinkyagarwal</li>
<li>www.devikabatra.in</li>
<li>katlin.in</li>
<li>riyaverma.in</li>
<li>escortsinindia.co/</li>
<li>www.snehamumbaiescorts.in</li>
<li>shimi.in</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescortsforu.com/about</li>
<li>www.chetnagaur.co.in/chetna-gaur.html</li>
<li>www.escortspoint.in</li>
<li>www.rupalikakkar.in</li>
<li>www.hemangisinha.co.in</li>
<li>1escorts.in/location/mumbai.html</li>
<li>www.salini.in/navi-mumbai-independent—escort-service.php</li>
<li>www.salini.in/navi-mumbai-independent-escort-service.php</li>
<li>www.mumbaibella.in</li>
<li>mohitescortservicesmumbai.com</li>
<li>www.anchu.in</li>
<li>www.aliyaroy.co.in</li>
<li>jaanu.co.in/mumbai-escorts-service-call-girls.html</li>
<li>www.andyverma.com</li>
<li>dreams-come-true.biz</li>
<li>feel–better.biz</li>
<li>jellyroll.biz</li>
<li>dreamgirlmumbai.com</li>
<li>role-play.biz</li>
<li>mansi—mathur.com</li>
<li>www.zarinmumbaiescorts.com</li>
<li>mymumbai.escortss.com</li>
<li>www.goldentouchescorts.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaipassion.biz</li>
<li>ishitamalhotra.com</li>
<li>happy-ending.biz</li>
<li>juicylips.biz</li>
<li>www.escortsmumbai.name</li>
<li>www.kirstygbasai.net</li>
<li>www.hiremumbaiescorts.com</li>
<li>www.meeraescorts.com/mumbai-escorts.php</li>
<li>3–5–7star.biz</li>
<li>www.pranjaltiwari.com</li>
<li>www.richagupta.biz</li>
<li>way2heaven.biz</li>
<li>piya.co/</li>
<li>pinkflowers.info</li>
<li>www.beautifulmumbaiescorts.com</li>
<li>www.bestescortsinmumbai.com/charges-html</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescorts.me</li>
<li>www.tanikatondon.com</li>
<li>www.escortsinmumbai.biz</li>
<li>www.escortgirlmumbai.com</li>
<li>www.mumbaicallgrils.com</li>
<li>www.quickescort4u.com</li>
<li>www.mayamalhotra.com</li>
<li>www.legal-escort.com</li>
<li>escortsbaba.com/mumbai-escorts.html</li>
<li>rupa.biz</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescorts.agency/erotic-service-mumbai.html</li>
<li>www.escortscelebrity.com</li>
<li>www.independentescortservicemumbai.com/mumbai%20escort%20servi..</li>
<li>garimachopra.com</li>
<li>kajalgupta.biz</li>
<li>lipkiss.site</li>
<li>aanu.in</li>
<li>bombayescort.in</li>
<li>hotkiran.co.in</li>
<li>khushikapoor.in</li>
<li>joyapatel.in</li>
<li>rici.in</li>
<li>aaditi.in</li>
<li>andheriescorts.org.in</li>
<li>www.jiyapatel.in</li>
<li>spicymumbai.in</li>
<li>rimpyarora.in</li>
<li>lovemaking.co.in</li>
<li>riyadubey.co.in</li>
<li>escortservicesmumbai.in</li>
<li>mumbaiescorts.co.in</li>
<li>midnightprincess.in/</li>
<li>vashiescorts.co.in/</li>
<li>angee.in/</li>
<li>www.rozakhan.in/</li>
<li>www.mumbaiescortsvilla.in/</li>
<li>kylie.co.in/</li>
<li>escortservicemumbai.co.in</li>
</ol>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/list-of-blocked-escort-service-websites'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/list-of-blocked-escort-service-websites</a>
</p>
No publisherpraneshFreedom of Speech and Expression69ABlockingCensorship2016-06-15T08:33:31ZBlog EntryCriminal defamation remains and so does the debate
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/criminal-defamation-remains-and-so-does-the-debate
<b></b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The judgment on the plea to de-criminalise defamation is out and despite its verbosity and rich vocabulary is an embarrassment to our recent judicial milestone of constitutional challenges. In the case of <a href="http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/FileServer/2016-05-13_1463126071.pdf">Subramanian Swamy vs. Union of India</a>, a two judge bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra, has upheld the constitutionality of <a href="https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1041742/">Section 499</a> and <a href="https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1408202/">Section 500</a> of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and <a href="https://indiankanoon.org/doc/27007/">Section199</a> of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) that criminalise defamation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The judgment has not satisfactorily answered several pertinent questions. Various significant issues relating to the existing regime of defamation have been touched upon in the judgment but the bench has skipped the part where it is required to analyse and give its own reasoning for upholding or reading down the law. This post points out what should have been looked at.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><b>A. </b><b>Whether defamation is a public or a private wrong? What is the State’s interest in protecting the reputation of an individual against other private individuals? Is criminal penalty for defamatory statements an appropriate, adequate or disproportionate remedy for loss of reputation?</b></h3>
<p><b><br /></b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">At the core of the debate to decriminalise defamation lies the question, whether defamation is a public or a private wrong. The question was raised in the Subramanian Swamy case and the court held that defamation is a public wrong. Our problem with the court’s decision lies in its failure to provide a sound and comprehensive analysis of the issue. In order to understand whether defamation is a public or a private wrong, it is necessary that we look at <i>what reputation means, what happens when reputation is harmed and whose interests are affected by such harm.</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Reputation is not defined in law, however the Supreme Court has <a href="https://indiankanoon.org/doc/194914590/">held</a> that reputation is a right to enjoy the good opinion of others and the good name, the credit, honour or character which is derived from such favourable public opinion. The definition reflects several elements that constitute reputation which when harmed have different bearing on the reputation of an individual. Academic Robert C Post in his <a href="http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1216&context=fss_papers">paper</a>, The Social Foundations on Defamation Law: Reputation and Constitution, says that reputation can be understood as <i>a form of intangible property akin to goodwill </i>or <i>as dignity (the respect including self-respect that arises from observance of rules of the society)</i>. While reputation when seen as property can be estimated in money and thus adequately compensated through a civil action for damages, loss of dignity is not a materially quantifiable loss, and thus, monetary compensation appears irrelevant. The purpose of the defamation law could either be to ensure that reputation is not wrongfully deprived of its proper market value or the respect/acceptance of the society. Explanation 4 to Section 499 of the IPC accommodates both such situations and provides that <i>reputation is harmed</i> <i>if it directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person, or lowers the character of that person in respect of his caste or of his calling, or lowers the credit of that person, or causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a loathsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful.</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Post adds that an individual’s reputation is a product of his interaction with the society by following the norms of conduct (which he calls rules of civility) created by the society, thus <i>the society has an interest in enforcing its rules </i>of civility<i> through defamation law by policing breaches of these rules</i>. Criminal defamation acknowledges that loss of reputation is a wrong to the societal interests; however these interests have not been deliberated upon by the courts in India.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Subramanian Swamy case was an occasion where, it was imperative that the court took up this exercise and explained what interest the society had in protecting the reputation of an individual for it to be classified as a public wrong. The court stated, “<i>the law relating to defamation protects the reputation of each individual in the perception of the public at large. It matters to an individual in the eyes of the society. There is a link and connect between individual rights and the society; and this connection gives rise to community interest at large. Therefore, when harm is caused to an individual, the society as a whole is affected and the danger is perceived</i>” With this reasoning it can be inferred that the society has an interest in all private wrongs. Where would that inference land us? This reasoning is ambiguous and inadequate.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On the other hand, criminal penalty for perfectly private wrongs such as copyright infringement and dishonour of cheques urges us to ask if there is a problem with the rigid distinction of public and private wrongs. Should we be asking the question differently?<span> </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The judgment has provided extremely inadequate answers to this question and has left matters ambiguous.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><b>B. </b><b>Can the right to reputation under Article 21 be enforced against another individual’s freedom of expression and are safeguards already built in law so as not to unreasonably restrict and stifle free expression in this regard?</b></h3>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><b> </b><span> </span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Defamation finds a place in the list of constitutionally allowed restrictions on freedom of speech under Article 19 (2). Defamation protects the right to reputation of an individual thus free expression by this reason is subject to the right to reputation of an individual. The court had repeatedly observed that right to reputation is a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. The question of enforceability of right to reputation under Article 21 against freedom of expression under Article 19 (1) (a) came into question in the instant case; it was contended that a fundamental right is enforceable against the State but cannot be invoked to serve a private interest of an individual. Thus, the right to reputation as manifested in defamation being a wrong committed against a private person by another person is unconnected and falls outside the scope of Article 19 (2). It is pertinent to note that Article 21 (which includes right to reputation) is enforceable not only against the state but also against private individuals. What is relevant here is an understanding of horizontal enforceability of fundamental rights (certain fundamental rights can be enforced against private individuals and non-state actors). This would help explain the dilemma in enforcing the right to reputation of an individual against free speech of another individual. It is vaguely mentioned in the judgment (see <i>para 88</i>) but has not been deliberated upon.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">What follows from the discussion of enforceability of right to reputation, is the discussion on how reasonably it restricts speech. The Supreme Court has previously <a href="https://indiankanoon.org/doc/554839/">held</a> that while determining reasonableness, the underlying purpose of the restrictions imposed, the extent and urgency of the evil sought to be remedied thereby, the disproportion of the imposition, the prevailing conditions at the time, should all enter into the judicial verdict. We briefly analyse the critical aspects of the regime of criminal defamation on these parameters.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i> </i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>Underlying purpose</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">At the heart of the defamation law is the need to find the most suitable remedy for loss of reputation of an individual. How does one restore reputation of an individual in the society and whether criminal penalty an appropriate remedy?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i> </i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>Extent of restriction </i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The extent to which defamation law restricts free speech could be analysed by looking at various aspects such as what kind of speech is considered defamatory, what procedure is followed to bring action against the alleged wrong doer and scope of abuse of the law. Explanation 1 to Section 499 of IPC provides that a statement or imputation is defamatory if it is not made in public good. It is not sufficient to prove that such statement or imputation is in fact true. The idea of public good is at best vague without any means to evaluate it. Further, under Section 199 of CrPC allows multiple complaints to be filed in different jurisdictions for a single offensive publication. Besides, usage of terms like “some person aggrieved” leaves room for parties other than the person in respect of whom defamatory material is published to bring action and the provision also allows the privilege of two sets of procedures for prosecution (in official capacity and in private capacity) to public servants without satisfactory reasoning provided for such discrimination. These provisions have the potential to be used to file frivolous complaints and could be a <a href="https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1327342/">handy tool for harassment</a> of journalists or activists among others.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i> </i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>Proportionality</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Does the publication or imputation of defamatory material warrant payment of fine and imprisonment? Earlier in the post, we brought up the question of relevance of such measures to the act of defamation. Assuming that it is relevant, do we think it is harsh or commensurate to the wrongful act. It is necessary to look at the process of prosecution before we determine the proportionality of the restriction. Criminal law assumes that the accused is innocent until he is proven guilty. Therefore until the judiciary determines that the act of defamation was committed, how does the process help the accused in maintaining status quo. It is also pertinent to look at the threshold for civil defamation. Under the civil wrong of defamation, truth works as a complete defence while under criminal defamation, a statement despite being true could invite penalty if it is not published in public good. Thus a lower threshold for criminal liability would upset the balance of proportionality. These aspects are critical to determine the reasonableness of criminal defamation and it is unfortunate that the judgment that runs into hundreds of pages has not evaluated them.</p>
<h3><b>Conclusion</b><span style="text-decoration: underline;"> </span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The convoluted debate on criminal defamation remains intact post the pronouncement of this judgment. Questions of competing interests of society and individuals or individuals per se, and ambiguous rationale behind imposition of liability, arbitrariness of procedure for prosecution have not been examined. Further, the hardship in compartmentalising free speech, the right to reputation and the right to privacy remains unanswered.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/criminal-defamation-remains-and-so-does-the-debate'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/criminal-defamation-remains-and-so-does-the-debate</a>
</p>
No publisherJapreet GrewalCriminal DefamationDefamationFreedom of Speech and ExpressionCensorship2016-05-23T06:05:17ZBlog EntryYou will need a license to create a WhatsApp group in Kashmir
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/governance-now-april-19-2016-you-will-need-a-license-to-create-whatsapp-group-in-kashmir
<b>The internet rights activists have criticised the move stating it as unconstitutional.</b>
<p>The article was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.governancenow.com/news/regular-story/you-may-need-a-license-in-kashmir-run-a-whatsapp-group">published by Governance Now</a> on April 19, 2016. Pranesh Prakash tweeted on this.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Moving beyond internet ban, Kashmir’s Kupwara district issued a notice asking all admins of WhatsApp news groups to register their groups with the district authority within ten days.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">With this move, the authorities are taking power in their hands to monitor WhatsApp news groups owned by private individuals. However, internet rights activists criticised it saying the move is unconstitutional as it breaches freedom of speech.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The circular is issued under the subject of ‘registering of WhatsApp news group and restrictions for spreading rumours thereof’. The district magistrate said that any spread of information by these WhatsApp news groups, “leading to untoward incidents will be dealt under the law”.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">You may need a license in Kashmir to run a WhatsApp group</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><img src="http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/WhatsApp.jpg" alt="WhatsApp" class="image-inline" title="WhatsApp" /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The valley witnessed five-day internet shutdown following the Handwara firing incident. Internet ban is a common phenomenon in Kashmir. <br /><br /> “For how long will the government decide whether we can communicate with each other or not? Actually, the authorities do not want us to spread the truth about the army’s atrocities far and wide,” said a resident of Handwara as quoted in Kashmir Reader.<br /><br /> Earlier, parts of Haryan and Gujarat also witnessed internet ban during Jat and Patidar agitation, respectively.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="http://www.governancenow.com/gov-next/egov/hard-broad-ban-internet-haryana-jat-agitation" target="_blank"><span>Blocking all internet access </span></a>is clearly an unnecessary and disproportionate measure that cannot be countenanced as a ‘reasonable restriction’ on freedom of expression and the right to seek and receive information, which is an integral part of the freedom of expression,” said Pranesh Prakash.<br /><br /> For instance, he adds, a riot-affected woman seeking to find out the address of the nearest hospital cannot do so on her phone. “Instead of blocking access to the internet, the government should seek to quell rumours by using social networks to spread the truth, and by using social networks to warn potential rioters of the consequences,” he said. <br /><br /> Former Mumbai police commissioner Rakesh Maria used WhatsApp to counter rumours spread after circulation of a fake photo in January 2015. <br /><br /> “The way in which the ban is imposed is unreasonable. Problem is in the method that is being used in absence of guidelines, defining circumstances under which they can impose a restriction on internet sites,” says Arun Kumar, head of cyber initiatives at Observer Research Foundation (ORF). <br /><br /> If government formulates these rules or guidelines it will set a threshold for state or central authorities, which will define the urgency of imposing ban on internet services.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/governance-now-april-19-2016-you-will-need-a-license-to-create-whatsapp-group-in-kashmir'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/governance-now-april-19-2016-you-will-need-a-license-to-create-whatsapp-group-in-kashmir</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial MediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceCensorshipWhatsApp2016-04-21T02:34:46ZNews ItemOnline Censorship on the Rise: Why I Prefer to Save Things Offline
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/indian-express-nishant-shah-april-17-2016-online-censorship-on-the-rise
<b>As governments use their power to erase what they do not approve of from the web, cloud storage will not be enough.</b>
<p>The article was <a class="external-link" href="http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/social/save-before-you-exit-window/">published in the Indian Express</a> on April 17, 2016.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It took me some time to trust the cloud. Growing up with digital technologies that were neither resilient nor reliable — a floppy drive could go kaput without you having done anything, a CD once scratched could not be recovered, hard drives malfunctioned and it was a given that once every few months your PC would crash and need a re-install — I have always been paranoid about making backups and storing information. Once I kicked into my professional years, I developed a foolproof, albeit paranoid, system, where I backed up my machines to a common hard drive, made a mirror image of that hard drive, and for absolutely crucial documents, I would put them on to a separate DVD which would have the emergency documents. It was around 2006, when I discovered the cloud.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It began with <a href="http://indianexpress.com/tag/google/"><span>Google</span></a>’s unlimited email accounts where you could mail information to yourself and then it would stay there for a digital eternity. I noticed that the size of my digital storage began decreasing. I no longer download videos I find on the web. I don’t save information on a device and I have come to think of the web as one large cloud, relying on the fact that if something is online once, it will always be available to me.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">However, over the last couple of months, I have started noticing something different in my usage patterns. These days, when I do come across interesting information, instead of merely indexing it, I find myself making an offline copy of that information. Tweets enter a Storify folder. YouTube videos get downloaded. I make PDF copies of blogs and take screenshots of digital medial updates. I have been wondering why I am suddenly so invested in archiving the web when, theoretically, it is always there.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">When I voiced this to a group of young students, I was surprised to hear that I wasn’t alone. The web is becoming a space that is crowded with take-downs, deletions, removals, and retractions which leave no archival memory. The students quickly pointed out that these take-downs are not just personal redactions. In fact, what we personally choose to remove has very little chances of actually disappearing from the web. Instead, these are things that are removed by governments, private companies and intermediaries who are being largely held liable for the content of the information that they make available.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Turkey, recently, demanded that German authorities remove a satirical German video titled Erdowie, Erdowo, Erdogan mocking their President. In response, Germany reminded the Turkish diplomacy of that lovely little thing called freedom of speech, and in the meantime, Extra 3, the group that had released the video on YouTube, added English subtitles to the video. Just for perks. I hope you gave a brownie point to Germany, even as you scrambled to see the video.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On the home front, though, things are not as celebratory. The minister of state for information and broadcasting, Rajyavardhan Rathore, and the head of the <a href="http://indianexpress.com/tag/bjp/"><span>BJP</span></a>’s information and technology cell, Arvind Gupta, have called for action against journalist Raghav Chopra who tweeted a photoshopped image of PM <a href="http://indianexpress.com/profile/politician/narendra-modi/"><span>Narendra Modi</span></a> bending down to touch the feet of a man dressed in Saudi Arabia’s national dress, to make a political comment about the PM’s recent visit to SA.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The two politicos, who have not had much to say about the doctored videos that were used to convict innocent students in JNU or the photoshopping that the government’s Press Information Bureau had indulged in to give us that iconic image of the prime minister doing an aerial survey of #ChennaiFloods, have taken umbrage against an image because it seems (obviously) false, and are demanding its takedown.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">My proclivity for saving things offline is perhaps fuelled by this web of partisan censorship and the atmosphere of precarious hostility that governments seem to be supporting. Increasingly, we have seen, in India and around the globe, a rush of political power that exercises its clout to remove information, images and stories that they do not approve of.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Instinctively, I am reacting to the fact that intellectual questioning or cultural critique is being removed from the web at the behest of these vested powers, and that the cloud, light and airy as it sounds, is prone to some incredible acts of censorship and removal. I have found myself facing too many removal notices and take-down errors when trying to revisit bookmarked sites, that I am beginning to feel that the only way to keep my information safe might be to archive the whole web on a personal server.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/indian-express-nishant-shah-april-17-2016-online-censorship-on-the-rise'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/indian-express-nishant-shah-april-17-2016-online-censorship-on-the-rise</a>
</p>
No publishernishantInternet GovernanceCensorship2016-06-05T03:26:50ZBlog EntryWhy India snubbed Facebook's free Internet offer
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/why-india-snubbed-facebooks-free-internet-offer
<b>The social media giant wanted to give the people of India free access to a chunk of the Internet, but the people weren't interested.</b>
<p>The blog post by Daniel Van Boom was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.cnet.com/news/why-india-doesnt-want-free-basics/">published by Cnet</a> on February 26, 2016. Sunil Abraham was quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Mark Zuckerberg's ambitious mission to provide free Internet access to rural India was rejected by the people it was intended to help long before the country's regulators banned it earlier this month.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Around the country, farmers, labourers and office workers scorned Facebook's offer. Called Free Basics, it provided only limited access to the Internet through a suite of websites and services that, unsurprisingly, included Facebook. They felt the limited service didn't follow the open nature of the Internet, where all sites and online destinations should be equally accessible, so they organized real-world protests and an online Save The Internet campaign, with the message that Zuckerberg's efforts weren't welcome.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">You might think people would jump at the opportunity to access Facebook for free, especially since more than a billion people use the social network every day. But it's that hitch -- that they can't access everything else -- which is precisely the problem, said Sunil Abraham, the executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society India. "Even if somebody spends 90 percent of their time on Facebook, that 10 percent is equally as important."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Indian regulators sided with popular opinion and <a href="http://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-free-basics-gets-blocked-in-india/"><span>cut off Free Basics</span></a> in the world's second-most populous country on February 8. The ruling by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) forbids all zero-rating plans, meaning anyone offering customers free access to only a limited set of services of sites are banned. It was championed as a victory for Net neutrality, the principle that everyone should have equal access to all content on the Internet.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The decision was undoubtedly a blow for Facebook, which says it wants to connect the billions of have-nots around the world to the Internet through the program. While more than half the world's online population uses Facebook each month, the company's efforts to connect with the developing world -- with Free Basics also being available in over 30 other countries, such as Kenya and Iraq -- could be a boon for business.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"[The Internet] must remain neutral for everyone, individuals and businesses alike. Everyone must have equal access to it," said Rajesh Sawhney, a Mumbai-based tech entrepreneur, in support of TRAI's decision to reject Free Basics. He believes the zero-rating scheme can be misused by telcos and other companies to create divisive ecosystems, where certain brands or companies are included and others aren't.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The package wasn't without its supporters though, with some being disappointed with the government's intervention in the marketplace.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"It is generally assumed that there is something sinister behind violations of Net neutrality...but that is not always true," says software engineer Shashank Mehra. "ISPs trying to match consumer demand isn't something sinister, it is a market process."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The social media giant further defends itself by pointing out that Free Basics is <a href="https://info.internet.org/en/2015/11/19/internet-org-myths-and-facts/" target="_blank"><span>open to any and all developers</span></a>, including competitors Twitter and Google, as long as they meet the program's <a href="https://developers.facebook.com/docs/internet-org/platform-technical-guidelines" target="_blank"><span>technical standards.</span></a> This evidently wasn't enough to convince much of India.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">The problem persists</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Facebook disputes claims that its interest in India is commercial, saying its efforts are humanitarian. In speeches over the past few months, Zuckerberg has painted Internet access as a tool for global good. "The research has shown on this that for every 10 people who get access to the internet, about one person gets a new job, and about one person gets lifted out of poverty," <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqkKiGhIyXs#t=4m03s" target="_blank"><span>he said at a Townhall Q&A</span></a> in Delhi last October. "Connecting things in India is one of the most important things we can do in the world."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Zuckerberg appears to have taken the loss in stride. <a href="http://www.cnet.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-internet-org-telecoms-project-mobile-world-congress-2016/"><span>During a keynote address at the Mobile World Conference in Barcelona</span></a> earlier this week, he admitted to being disappointed by the ruling, but added, "We are going to focus on different programs [in India]...we want to work with all the operators there." A Facebook spokesperson said the company "will continue our efforts to eliminate barriers and give the unconnected an easier path to the Internet and the opportunity it brings."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Those ideals could certainly help in India, where around <a href="http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.RUR.TOTL.ZS" target="_blank"><span>68 percent</span></a> of its population -- about 880 million people -- live in rural conditions or poverty. The promise of free access to health, education, local and national news through an Internet connection could potentially improve quality of live. So what's the problem?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The service providers would also be granting free Facebook.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Peggy Wolff, a volunteer coordinator at education NGO Isha Vidhya, says Facebook is just the latest in a long line of international companies hoping to crack rural India, where the bulk of the country's poor live.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">While admitting that low cost or free Internet is imperative in rural areas, that "smart villages" are needed to help ease the human burden on India's increasingly overcrowded cities, she says, "Free basics is just a bit suspicious to most people. There's just too much vested interest."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"The big question." Sawhney says, "is how do we give fast and free Internet to a large section of society in India?"</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There are alternatives. United States-based Jana, for instance, developed an Android app called mCent that allows its growing userbase of 30 million to earn data by downloading and using certain apps or watching advertisements from sponsors. Unlike Free Basics, that data can be expended on any online destination.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Jana's CEO Nathan Eagle, like Zuckerberg, says his mission is to bring Internet connectivity to the next billion people. "Today, Internet connectivity in emerging markets is much more an issue of affordability, rather than access," he explains. "1.3 billion people in emerging markets now have Android phones...it's the cost of data that is prohibitive."</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/why-india-snubbed-facebooks-free-internet-offer'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/why-india-snubbed-facebooks-free-internet-offer</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFree BasicsFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceCensorship2016-02-27T07:49:08ZNews ItemThe Internet Has a New Standard for Censorship
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-wire-jyoti-panday-january-29-2016-internet-has-a-new-standard-for-censorship
<b>The introduction of the new 451 HTTP Error Status Code for blocked websites is a big step forward in cataloguing online censorship, especially in a country like India where access to information is routinely restricted.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The article was published in the Wire on January 29, 2016. The original can be <a class="external-link" href="http://thewire.in/2016/01/29/the-internet-has-a-new-standard-for-censorship-20386/">read here</a>.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Ray Bradbury’s dystopian novel Fahrenheit 451 opens with the declaration, “It was a pleasure to burn.” The six unassuming words offer a glimpse into the mindset of the novel’s protagonist, ‘the fireman’ Guy Montag, who burns books. Montag occupies a world of totalitarian state control over the media where learning is suppressed and censorship prevails. The title alludes to the ‘temperature at which book paper catches fire and burns,’ an apt reference to the act of violence committed against citizens through the systematic destruction of literature. It is tempting to think about the novel solely as a story of censorship. It certainly is. But it is also a story about the value of intellectual freedom and the importance of information.<br /><br />Published in 1953, Bradbury’s story predates home computers, the Internet, Twitter and Facebook, and yet it anticipates the evolution of these technologies as tools for censorship. When the state seeks to censor speech, they use the most effective and easiest mechanisms available. In Bradbury’s dystopian world, burning books did the trick; in today’s world, governments achieve this by blocking access to information online. The majority of the world’s Internet users encounter censorship even if the contours of control vary depending on the country’s policies and infrastructure.</p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; ">Online censorship in India</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>In India, information access blockades have become commonplace and are increasingly enforced across the country for maintaining political stability, for economic </span><a href="http://www.indiantelevision.com/regulators/high-court/delhi-hc-restrains-200-websites-from-illegally-showing-balajis-kyaa-kool-hain-hum-3-160123" target="_blank"><span>reasons</span></a><span>, in defence of national security or preserving social values. Last week, the Maharashtra Anti-terror Squad </span><a href="http://www.abplive.in/india-news/maharashtra-ats-blocks-94-isis-websites-brainwashing-the-youth-280192"><span>blocked</span></a><span> 94 websites that were allegedly radicalising the youth to join the militant group ISIS. Memorably, in 2015 the NDA government’s ham-fisted </span><a href="http://thewire.in/2015/08/03/the-government-does-not-want-you-accessing-porn-on-the-internet-anymore-7782/"><span>attempts</span></a><span> at enforcing a ban on online pornography resulted in widespread public outrage. Instead of revoking the ban, the government issued yet another vaguely worded and in many senses astonishing order. As reported by </span><i><a href="http://www.medianama.com/2015/08/223-porn-india-ban/"><span>Medianama</span></a></i><span>, the revised order delegates the responsibility of determining whether banned websites should remain unavailable to private intermediaries. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The state’s shifting reasons for blocking access to information is reflective of its tendentious attitude towards speech and expression. Free speech in India is messily contested and normally, the role of the judiciary acts as a check on the executive’s proclivity for banning. For instance, in 2010 the Supreme Court </span><a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Supreme-Court-lifts-ban-on-James-Laines-book-on-Shivaji/articleshow/6148410.cms"><span>upheld</span></a><span> the Maharashtra High Court’s decision to revoke the ban on the book on Shivaji by American author James Laine, which, according to the state government, contained material promoting social enmity. However, in the context of communications technology the traditional role of courts is increasingly being passed on to private intermediaries. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The delegation of authority is evident in the government notifying intermediaries to proactively filter content for ‘child pornography’ in the revised </span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/dot-morality-block-order-2015-07-31/view"><span>order</span></a><span> issued to deal with websites blocked as result of its crackdown on pornography. Such screening and filtering requires intermediaries to make a determination on the legality of content in order to avoid direct liability. As international best practices such as the </span><a href="https://www.manilaprinciples.org/"><span>Manila Principles on Intermediary Liability</span></a> <span>point out, such screening is a slow process and costly and intermediaries are incentivised to simply limit access to information. </span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><span>Blocking procedures and secrecy</span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The constitutional validity of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2008 which grants power to the executive to block access to information unchecked, and in secrecy was challenged in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. Curiously, the Supreme Court upheld S69A reasoning that the provisions were narrowly-drawn with adequate safeguards and noted that any procedural inconsistencies may be challenged through writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. Unfortunately as past instances of blocking under S69A reveal the provisions are littered with procedural deficiencies, amplified manifold by the authorities responsible for interpreting and implementing the orders.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Problematically, an </span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/is-india2019s-website-blocking-law-constitutional-2013-i-law-procedure"><span>opaque</span></a><span> confidentiality criteria built into the blocking rules mandates secrecy in requests and recommendations for blocking and places written orders outside the purview of public scrutiny. As there are no comprehensive list of blocked websites or of the legal orders, the public has to rely on ISPs leaking orders, or media reports to understand the censorship regime in India. RTI applications requesting further information on the implementation of these safeguards have at best provided</span> <a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/response-deity.clarifying-procedures-for-blocking.pdf"><span>incomplete</span></a><span> information. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Historically, the courts in India have </span><a href="http://www.livemint.com/Politics/hDIjjunGikWywOgSRiM7NP/SC-has-set-a-high-threshold-for-tolerance-Lawrence-Liang.html"><span>held</span></a><span> that Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India is as much about the right to receive information as it is to disseminate, and when there is a chilling effect on speech, it also violates the right to receive information. Therefore, if a website is blocked citizens have a constitutional right to know the legal grounds on which access is being restricted. Just like the government announces and clarifies the grounds when banning a book, users have a right to know the grounds for restrictions on their speech online. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Unfortunately, under the</span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/deity-says-143-urls-blocked-in-2015"> <span>present</span></a><span> blocking regime in India there is no easy way for a service provider to comply with a blocking order while also notifying users that censorship has taken place. The ‘</span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/information-technology-procedure-and-safeguards-for-blocking-for-access-of-information-by-public-rules-2009"><span>Blocking Rules</span></a><span>’ require notice “person </span><span>or</span><span> intermediary” thus implying that notice may be sent to either the originator or the intermediary. Further, the confidentiality clause </span><a href="https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/2015/03/25/the-supreme-courts-it-act-judgment-and-secret-blocking/"><span>raises</span></a><span> the presumption that nobody beyond the intermediaries ought to know about a block. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Naturally, intermediaries interested in self-preservation and avoiding conflict with the government become complicit in maintaining secrecy in blocking orders. As a result, it is often difficult to determine why content is inaccessible and users often mistake censorship for technical problem in accessing content. Consequently, pursuing legal recourse or trying to hold the government accountable for their censorious activity becomes a challenge. In failing to consider the constitutional merits of the confidentiality clause, the Supreme Court has shied away from addressing the over-broad reach of the executive. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Secrecy in removing or blocking access is a global problem that places limits on the transparency expected from ISPs. Across </span><a href="https://books.google.co.in/books?id=s1LBBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA88&lpg=PA88&dq=transparency+and+blocking+orders&source=bl&ots=8kJ5LNJU5s&sig=gB9E01_gQ3QsjwFtnpa5KdIL8oA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwirzr7ZlMzKAhXEt44KHdxkBxQQ6AEIOzAF#v=onepage&q=transparency%20and%20blocking%20orders&f=false"><span>many</span></a><span> jurisdictions intermediaries are legally </span><a href="https://books.google.co.in/books?id=s1LBBwAAQBAJ&pg=PA88&lpg=PA88&dq=transparency+and+blocking+orders&source=bl&ots=8kJ5LNJU5s&sig=gB9E01_gQ3QsjwFtnpa5KdIL8oA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwirzr7ZlMzKAhXEt44KHdxkBxQQ6AEIOzAF#v=onepage&q=transparency%20and%20blocking%20orders&f=false"><span>prohibited</span></a><span> from publicising filtering orders as well as information relating to content or service restrictions. For example in United Kingdom, ISPs are prohibited from revealing blocking orders related to terrorism and surveillance. In South Korea, the </span><a href="http://www.singo.or.kr/eng/01_introduction/introduction.php"><span>Korean Communications Standards Commission</span></a><span> holds public meetings that are open to the public. However, the sheer v</span><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/south-korea-only-thing-worse-online-censorship"><span>olume</span></a><span> of censorship (i.e. close to 10,000 URLs a month) makes it </span><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/south-korea-only-thing-worse-online-censorship"><span>unwieldy</span></a><span> for public oversight. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>As the Manila Principles </span><a href="https://www.eff.org/files/2015/07/08/manila_principles_background_paper.pdf"><span>note</span></a><span>, providing users with an explanation and reasons for placing restrictions on their speech and expression increases civic engagement. Transparency standards will empower citizens to demand that companies and governments they interact with are more accountable when it comes to content regulation. It is worth noting, for conduits as opposed to content hosts, it may not always be technically feasible for to provide a notice when content is unavailable due to filtering. A new standard helps improve transparency standards for network level intermediaries and for websites bound by confidentiality requirements. The recently introduced HTTP code for errors is a critical step forward in cataloguing censorship on the Internet. </span></p>
<h3 style="text-align: justify; "><span>A standardised code for censorship</span></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>On December 21, 2015, the Internet Engineering Standards Group (IESG) which is the organisation responsible for reviewing and updating the internet’s operating standards approved the publication of 451-’An HTTP Status Code to Report Legal Obstacles’. The code provides intermediaries a standardised way to notify users know when a website is unavailable following a legal order. Publishing the code allows intermediaries to be transparent about their compliance with court and executive orders across jurisdictions and is a huge step forward for capturing online censorship. HTTP code 451 was introduced by software engineer Tim Bray and the code’s name is an homage to Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Bray began developing the code after being inspired by a blog post by Terence Eden calling for a censorship error code. The code’s official status comes after two years of discussions within the technical community and is a result of campaigning from transparency and civil society advocates who have been pushing for clearer labelling of internet censorship. Initially, the code received pushback from within the technical community for reasons enumerated by Mark Nottingham, Chair of the IETF HTTP Working Group in his </span><a href="https://www.mnot.net/blog/2015/12/18/451"><span>blog</span></a><span>. However, soon sites began using the code on an experimental and unsanctioned basis and faced with increasing demand for and feedback, the code was accepted. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The HTTP code 451 works as a machine-readable flag and has immense potential as a tool for organisations and users who want to quantify and understand censorship on the internet. Cataloguing online censorship is a challenging, time-consuming and expensive task. The HTTP code 451 circumvents confidentiality obligations built into blocking or licensing regimes and reduces the cost of accessing blocking orders. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The code creates a distinction between websites blocked following a court or an executive order, and when information is inaccessible due to technical errors. If implemented widely, Bray’s new code will help </span><a href="http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/21/10632678/http-status-code-451-censorship-tim-bray"><span>prevent</span></a><span> confusion around blocked sites. The code addresses the issue of the ISP’s misleading and inaccurate usage of </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_403"><span>Error 403</span></a><span> ‘Forbidden’ (to indicate that the server can be reached and understood the request, but refuses to take any further action) or 404 ‘</span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_404"><span>Not Found</span></a><span>’ (to indicate that the requested resource could not be found but may be available again in the future). </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Adoption of the new standard is optional, though at present there are no laws in India that prevent intermediaries doing so. Implementing a standardised machine-readable flag for censorship will go a long way in bolstering the accountability of ISPs that have in the </span><a href="http://www.medianama.com/2014/12/223-india-blocks-imgur/"><span>past</span></a><span> targeted an entire domain instead of the specified URL. Adoption of the standard by ISPs will also improve the understanding of the burden imposed on intermediaries for censoring and filtering content as presently, there is no clarity on what constitutes compliance. Of course, censorious governments may </span><a href="https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/12/23/welcome-to-http-error-code-451-unavailable-for-legal-reasons/"><span>prohibit</span></a><span> the use of the code, for example by issuing an order that specifies not only that a page be blocked, but also precisely which HTTP return code should be used. Though such sanctions should be </span><a href="https://cdt.org/blog/censorship-transparency-comes-to-the-web/"><span>viewed</span></a><span> as evidence of systematic rights violation and totalitarian regimes. </span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>In India where access to software code repositories such as Github and Sourceforge are routinely </span><span><a href="http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/resources/2014-12-17_DoT-32-URL-Block-Order.pdf">restricted</a>,</span><span> the need for such code is obvious. The use of the code will improve confidence in blocking practices, allowing users to understand the grounds on which their right to information is being restricted. Improving transparency around censorship is the only way to build trust between the government and its citizens about the laws and policies applicable to internet content.</span></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-wire-jyoti-panday-january-29-2016-internet-has-a-new-standard-for-censorship'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-wire-jyoti-panday-january-29-2016-internet-has-a-new-standard-for-censorship</a>
</p>
No publisherjyotiFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceChilling EffectCensorship2016-01-30T09:17:54ZBlog EntryThe Humpty-Dumpty Censorship of Television in India
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-wire-bhairav-acharya-humpty-dumpty-censorship-of-tv-in-india
<b>The Modi government’s attack on Sathiyam TV is another manifestation of the Indian state’s paranoia of the medium of film and television, and consequently, the irrational controlling impulse of the law.</b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The article originally published in the Wire on September 8, 2015 was also mirrored on the website <a class="external-link" href="http://notacoda.net/2015/09/09/the-humpty-dumpty-censorship-of-television-in-india/">Free Speech/Privacy/Technology</a>.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is tempting to think of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting’s (MIB) <a href="http://www.livelaw.in/i-b-ministrys-warning-to-channel-for-comments-on-pm-modi-delhi-hc-seeks-reply/" target="_blank">attack on Sathiyam TV</a> solely as another authoritarian exhibition of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government’s intolerance of criticism and dissent. It certainly is. But it is also another manifestation of the Indian state’s paranoia of the medium of film and television, and consequently, the irrational controlling impulse of the law.</p>
<p><b>Sathiyam TV’s transgressions</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Sathiyam’s transgressions began more than a year ago, on May 9, 2014, when it broadcast a preacher saying of an unnamed person: “Oh Lord! Remove this satanic person from the world!” The preacher also allegedly claimed this “dreadful person” was threatening Christianity. This, the MIB reticently claims, “appeared to be targeting a political leader”, referring presumably to Prime Minister Modi, to “potentially give rise to a communally sensitive situation and incite the public to violent tendencies.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The MIB was also offended by a “senior journalist” who, on the same day, participated in a non-religious news discussion to allegedly claim Modi “engineered crowds at his rallies” and used “his oratorical skills to make people believe his false statements”. According to the MIB, this was defamatory and “appeared to malign and slander the Prime Minister which was repugnant to (his) esteemed office”.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">For these two incidents, Sathiyam was served a show-cause notice on 16 December 2014 which it responded to the next day, denying the MIB’s claims. Sathiyam was heard in-person by a committee of bureaucrats on 6 February 2015. On 12 May 2015, the MIB handed Sathiyam an official <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/277493911/Warning-Sathiyam-TV-Channel-12th-May-2015" target="_blank">an official “Warning”</a> which appears to be unsupported by law. Sathiyam moved the Delhi High Court to challenge this.</p>
<p>As Sathiyam sought judicial protection, the MIB issued the channel a <a href="http://www.catchnews.com/india-news/now-airing-the-hounding-of-a-tv-channel-for-showing-modi-in-bad-light-1441303238.html" target="_blank">second warning</a> August 26, 2016 citing three more objectionable news broadcasts of: a child being subjected to cruelty by a traditional healer in <a href="http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/newborn-forced-to-walk-by-witch-doctor-in-assam-village-as-fever-cure-764554" target="_blank">Assam</a>; a gun murder inside a government hospital in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2V4B2elMjo" target="_blank">Madhya Pradesh</a>; and, a self-immolating man rushing the dais at a BJP rally in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECDV5AieD4g" target="_blank">Telangana</a>. All three news items were carried by other news channels and websites.</p>
<p><b>Governing communications</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Most news providers use multiple media to transmit their content and suffer from complex and confusing regulation. Cable television is one such medium, so is the Internet; both media swiftly evolve to follow technological change. As the law struggles to keep up, governmental anxiety at the inability to perfectly control this vast field of speech and expression frequently expresses itself through acts of overreach and censorship.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In the newly-liberalised media landscape of the early 1990s, cable television sprang up in a legal vacuum. Doordarshan, the sole broadcaster, flourished in the Centre’s constitutionally-sanctioned monopoly of broadcasting which was only broken by the Supreme Court in 1995. The same year, Parliament enacted the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 (“Cable TV Act”) to create a licence regime to control cable television channels. The Cable TV Act is supplemented by the Cable Television Network Rules, 1994 (“Cable Rules”).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The state’s disquiet with communications technology is a recurring motif in modern Indian history. When the first telegraph line was laid in India, the colonial state was quick to recognize its potential for transmitting subversive speech and responded with strict controls. The fourth iteration of the telegraph law represents the colonial government’s perfection of the architecture of control. This law is the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, which continues to dominate communications governance in India today including, following a directive in 2004, broadcasting.</p>
<p><b>Vague and arbitrary law</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Cable TV Act requires cable news channels such as Sathiyam to obey a list of restrictions on content that is contained in the Cable Rules (“<a href="http://mib.nic.in/WriteReadData/documents/pc1.pdf" target="_blank">Programme Code</a>“). Failure to conform to the Programme Code can result in seizure of equipment and imprisonment; but, more importantly, creates the momentum necessary to invoke the broad powers of censorship to ban a programme, channel, or even the cable operator. But the Programme Code is littered with vague phrases and undefined terms that can mean anything the government wants them to mean.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">By its first warning of May 12, 2015, the MIB claimed Sathiyam violated four rules in the Programme Code. These include rule 6(1)(c) which bans visuals or words “which promote communal attitudes”; rule 6(1)(d) which bans “deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half-truths”; rule 6(1)(e) which bans anything “which promotes anti-national attitudes”; and, rule 6(1)(i) which bans anything that “criticises, maligns or slanders any…person or…groups, segments of social, public and moral life of the country” <i>(sic).</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The rest of the Programme Code is no less imprecise. It proscribes content that “offends against good taste” and “reflects a slandering, ironical and snobbish attitude” against communities. On the face of it, several provisions of the Programme Code travel beyond the permissible restrictions on free speech listed in Article 19(2) of the Constitution to question their validity. The fiasco of implementing the vague provisions of the erstwhile section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is a recent reminder of the dangers presented by poorly-drafted censorship law – which is why it was struck down by the Supreme Court for infringing the right to free speech. The Programme Code is an older creation, it has simply evaded scrutiny for two decades.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The arbitrariness of the Programme Code is amplified manifold by the authorities responsible for interpreting and implementing it. An Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) of bureaucrats, supposedly a recommendatory body, interprets the Programme Code before the MIB takes action against channels. This is an executive power of censorship that must survive legal and constitutional scrutiny, but has never been subjected to it. Curiously, the courts have shied away from a proper analysis of the Programme Code and the IMC.</p>
<p><b>Judicial challenges</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In 2011, a single judge of the Delhi High Court in the <a href="http://indiankanoon.org/doc/132453/" target="_blank"><i>Star India</i></a> case (2011) was asked to examine the legitimacy of the IMC as well as four separate clauses of the Programme Code including rule 6(1)(i), which has been invoked against Sathiyam. But the judge neatly sidestepped the issues. This feat of judicial adroitness was made possible by the crass indecency of the content in question, which could be reasonably restricted. Since the show clearly attracted at least one ground of legitimate censorship, the judge saw no cause to examine the other provisions of the Programme Code or even the composition of the IMC.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This judicial restraint has proved detrimental. In May 2013, another single judge of the Delhi High Court, who was asked by Comedy Central to adjudge the validity of the IMC’s decision-making process, relied on <i>Star India</i> (2011) to uphold the MIB’s action against the channel. The channel’s appeal to the Supreme Court is currently pending. If the Supreme Court decides to examine the validity of the IMC, the Delhi High Court may put aside Sathiyam’s petition to wait for legal clarity.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">As it happens, in the <a href="http://indiankanoon.org/doc/110813550/"><i>Shreya Singhal</i></a> case (2015) that struck down section 66A of the IT Act, the Supreme Court has an excellent precedent to follow to demand clarity and precision from the Programme Code, perhaps even strike it down, as well as due process from the MIB. On the accusation of defaming the Prime Minister, probably the only clearly stated objection by the MIB, the Supreme Court’s past law is clear: public servants cannot, for non-personal acts, claim defamation.</p>
<p><b>Censorship by blunt force</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Beyond the IMC’s advisories and warnings, the Cable TV Act contains two broad powers of censorship. The first empowerment in section 19 enables a government official to ban any programme or channel if it fails to comply with the Programme Code or, “if it is likely to promote, on grounds of religion, race, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, linguistic or regional groups or castes or communities or which is likely to disturb the public tranquility.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The second empowerment is much wider. Section 20 of the Cable TV Act permits the Central Government to ban an entire cable television operator, as opposed to a single channel or programmes within channels, if it “thinks it necessary or expedient so to do in public interest”. No reasons need be given and no grounds need be considered. Such a blunt use of force creates an overwhelming power of censorship. It is not a coincidence that section 20 resembles some provisions of nineteenth-century telegraph laws, which were designed to enable the colonial state to control the flow of information to its native subjects.</p>
<p><b>A manual for television bans</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="http://www.frontline.in/arts-and-culture/cinema/cut-and-thrust/article5185915.ece" target="_blank">Film</a> and television have <a href="http://thebigindianpicture.com/2013/03/the-heart-of-censorship/" target="_blank">always</a> attracted political attention and state censorship. In 1970, <a href="http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1719619/" target="_blank">Justice Hidayatullah</a> of the Supreme Court explained why: “It has been almost universally recognised that the treatment of motion pictures must be different from that of other forms of art and expression. This arises from the instant appeal of the motion picture… The motion picture is able to stir up emotions more deeply than any other product of art.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Within this historical narrative of censorship, television regulation is relatively new. <a href="http://www.indiantelevision.com/television/programming/tv-channels/regulations/ib-ministry-dictates-channels-to-follow-the-programme" target="_blank">Past governments</a> have also been quick to threaten censorship for attacking an incumbent Prime Minister. There seems to be a pan-governmental consensus that senior political leaders ought to be beyond reproach, irrespective of their words and deeds.</p>
<p>But on what grounds could the state justify these bans? Lord Atkins’ celebrated war-time dissent in <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liversidge_v_Anderson" target="_blank"><i>Liversidge</i></a> (1941) offers an unlikely answer:</p>
<p>“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.’”</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-wire-bhairav-acharya-humpty-dumpty-censorship-of-tv-in-india'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-wire-bhairav-acharya-humpty-dumpty-censorship-of-tv-in-india</a>
</p>
No publisherbhairavFreedom of Speech and ExpressionInternet GovernanceCensorship2015-11-29T08:37:53ZBlog EntryThe Case of Whatsapp Group Admins
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-case-of-whatsapp-group-admins
<b></b>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Censorship laws in India have now roped in group administrators of chat groups on instant messaging platforms such as Whatsapp (<i>group admin(s)</i>) for allegedly objectionable content that was posted by other users of these chat groups. Several incidents<a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn1">[1]</a> were reported this year where group admins were arrested in different parts of the country for allowing content that was allegedly objectionable under law. A few reports mentioned that these arrests were made under Section 153A<a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn2">[2]</a> read with Section 34<a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn3">[3]</a> of the Indian Penal Code (<i>IPC</i>) and Section 67<a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn4">[4]</a> of the Information Technology Act (<i>IT Act</i>).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Targeting of a group admin for content posted by other members of a chat group has raised concerns about how this liability is imputed. Whether a group admin should be considered an intermediary under Section 2 (w) of the IT Act? If yes, whether a group admin would be protected from such liability?</span></p>
<h3><strong>Group admin as an intermediary</strong></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><strong> </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Whatsapp is an instant messaging platform which can be used for mass communication by opting to create a chat group. A chat group is a feature on Whatsapp that allows joint participation of Whatsapp users. The number of Whatsapp users on a single chat group can be up to 100. Every chat group has one or more group admins who control participation in the group by deleting or adding people. <a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn5">[5]</a> It is imperative that we understand that by choosing to create a chat group on Whatsapp whether a group admin can become liable for content posted by other members of the chat group.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>Section 34 of the IPC provides that when a number of persons engage in a criminal act with a common intention, each person is made liable as if he alone did the act. Common intention implies a pre-arranged plan and acting in concert pursuant to the plan. It is interesting to note that group admins have been arrested under Section 153A on the ground that a group admin and a member posting content on a chat group that is actionable under this provision have common intention to post such content on the group. But would this hold true when for instance, a group admin creates a chat group for posting lawful content (say, for matchmaking purposes) and a member of the chat group posts content which is actionable under law (say, posting a video abusing Dalit women)? Common intention can be established by direct evidence or inferred from conduct or surrounding circumstances or from any incriminating facts.</span><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn6">[6]</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>We need to understand whether common intention can be established in case of a user merely acting as a group admin. For this purpose it is necessary to see how a group admin contributes to a chat group and whether he acts as an intermediary.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><strong> </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>We know that parameters for determining an intermediary differ across jurisdictions and most global organisations have categorised them based on their role or technical functions.</span><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn7">[7]</a><span> Section 2 (w) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (</span><i>IT Act</i><span>) defines an intermediary as </span><i>any person, who on behalf of another person, receives, stores or transmits messages or provides any service with respect to that message</i><span> </span><i>and includes the telecom services providers, network providers, internet service providers, web-hosting service providers, search engines, online payment sites, online-auction sites, online marketplaces and cyber cafés</i><span>. Does a group admin receive, store or transmit messages on behalf of group participants or provide any service with respect to messages of group participants or falls in any category mentioned in the definition? Whatsapp does not allow a group admin to receive, or store on behalf of another participant on a chat group. Every group member independently controls his posts on the group. However, a group admin helps in transmitting messages of another participant to the group by allowing the participant to be a part of the group thus effectively providing service in respect of messages. A group admin therefore, should be considered an intermediary. However his contribution to the chat group is limited to allowing participation but this is discussed in further detail in the section below.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in a 2010 report</span><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn8">[8]</a><span>, an internet intermediary brings together or facilitates transactions between third parties on the Internet. It gives access to, hosts, transmits and indexes content, products and services originated by third parties on the Internet or provide Internet-based services to third parties. A Whatsapp chat group allows people who are not on your list to interact with you if they are on the group admins’ contact list. In facilitating this interaction, according to the OECD definition, a group admin may be considered an intermediary.</span></p>
<h3><strong>Liability as an intermediary</strong></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><strong> </strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Section 79 (1) of the IT Act protects an intermediary from any liability under any law in force (for instance, liability under Section 153A pursuant to the rule laid down in Section 34 of IPC) if an intermediary fulfils certain conditions laid down therein. An intermediary is required to carry out certain due diligence obligations laid down in Rule 3 of the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011 (<i>Rules</i>). These obligations include monitoring content that infringes intellectual property, threatens national security or public order, or is obscene or defamatory or violates any law in force (Rule 3(2)).<a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn9">[9]</a> An intermediary is liable for publishing or hosting such user generated content, however, as mentioned earlier, this liability is conditional. Section 79 of IT Act states that an intermediary would be liable only if it initiates transmission, selects receiver of the transmission and selects or modifies information contained in the transmission that falls under any category mentioned in Rule 3 (2) of the Rules. While we know that a group admin has the ability to facilitate sharing of information and select receivers of such information, he has no direct editorial control over the information shared. Group admins can only remove members but cannot remove or modify the content posted by members of the chat group. An intermediary is liable in the event it fails to comply with due diligence obligations laid down under rule 3 (2) and 3 (3) of the Rules however, since a group admin lacks the authority to initiate transmission himself and control content, he can’t comply with these obligations. Therefore, a group admin would be protected from any liability arising out of third party/user generated content on his group pursuant to Section 79 of the IT Act.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>It is however relevant to note whether the ability of a group admin to remove participants amounts to an indirect form of editorial control.</span></p>
<h3><strong>Other pertinent observations</strong></h3>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><strong><span> </span></strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In several reports<a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn10">[10]</a> there have been discussions about how holding a group admin liable makes the process convenient as it is difficult to locate all the users of a particular group. This reasoning may not be correct as the Whatsapp policy<a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn11">[11]</a> makes it mandatory for a prospective user to provide his mobile number in order to use the platform and no additional information is collected from group admins which may justify why group admins are targeted. Investigation agencies can access mobile numbers of Whatsapp users and gain more information from telecom companies.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>It is also interesting to note that the group admins were arrested after a user or someone familiar to a user filed a complaint with the police about content being objectionable or hurtful. Earlier this year, the apex court had ruled in the case of </span><i>Shreya Singhal v. Union of India</i><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftn12">[12]</a><span> that an intermediary needed a court order or a government notification for taking down information. With actions taken against group admins on mere complaints filed by anyone, it is clear that the law enforcement officials have been overriding the mandate of the court.</span></p>
<h3><strong>Conclusion</strong></h3>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="text-align: justify; ">According to a study conducted by a global research consultancy, TNS Global, around 38 % of internet users in India use instant messaging applications such as Snapchat and Whatsapp on a daily basis, Whatsapp being the most widely used application. These figures indicate the scale of impact that arrests of group admins may have on our daily communication.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>It is noteworthy that categorising a group admin as an intermediary would effectively make the Rules applicable to all Whatsapp users intending to create groups and make it difficult to enforce and would perhaps blur the distinction between users and intermediaries.</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><span>The critical question however is whether a chat group is considered a part of the bundle of services that Whatsapp offers to its users and not as an independent platform that makes a group admin a separate entity. Also, would it be correct to draw comparison of a Whatsapp group chat with a conference call on Skype or sharing a Google document with edit rights to understand the domain in which censorship laws are penetrating today?</span></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "> </p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>Valuable contribution by Pranesh Prakash and Geetha Hariharan</i></p>
<hr size="1" style="text-align: justify; " width="33%" />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref1">[1]</a> <a href="http://www.nagpurtoday.in/whatsapp-admin-held-for-hurting-religious-sentiment/06250951">http://www.nagpurtoday.in/whatsapp-admin-held-for-hurting-religious-sentiment/06250951</a> ; <a href="http://www.catchnews.com/raipur-news/whatsapp-group-admin-arrested-for-spreading-obscene-video-of-mahatma-gandhi-1440835156.html">http://www.catchnews.com/raipur-news/whatsapp-group-admin-arrested-for-spreading-obscene-video-of-mahatma-gandhi-1440835156.html</a> ; <a href="http://www.financialexpress.com/article/india-news/whatsapp-group-admin-along-with-3-members-arrested-for-objectionable-content/147887/">http://www.financialexpress.com/article/india-news/whatsapp-group-admin-along-with-3-members-arrested-for-objectionable-content/147887/</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref2">[2]</a> Section 153A. “Promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc., and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.— (1) Whoever— (a) by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations or otherwise, promotes or attempts to promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, disharmony or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities…” or 2) Whoever commits an offence specified in sub-section (1) in any place of worship or in any assembly engaged in the performance of religious worship or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref3">[3]</a> Section 34. Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention – When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref4">[4]</a> Section 67 Publishing of information which is obscene in electronic form. -Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to one lakh rupees and in the event of a second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and also with fine which may extend to two lakh rupees."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref5">[5]</a> https://www.whatsapp.com/faq/en/general/21073373</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref6">[6]</a> Pandurang v. State of Hyderabad AIR 1955 SC 216</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref7">[7]</a><a href="https://www.eff.org/files/2015/07/08/manila_principles_background_paper.pdf">https://www.eff.org/files/2015/07/08/manila_principles_background_paper.pdf</a>; <a href="http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002311/231162e.pdf">http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002311/231162e.pdf</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref8">[8]</a> http://www.oecd.org/internet/ieconomy/44949023.pdf</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref9">[9]</a> Rule 3(2) (b) of the Rules</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref10">[10]</a><a href="http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/if-you-are-a-whatsapp-group-admin-better-be-careful/article7531350.ece">http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/if-you-are-a-whatsapp-group-admin-better-be-careful/article7531350.ece</a>; http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/Social-Media-Administrator-You-Could-Land-in-Trouble/2015/10/10/article3071815.ece; <a href="http://www.medianama.com/2015/10/223-whatsapp-group-admin-arrest/">http://www.medianama.com/2015/10/223-whatsapp-group-admin-arrest/</a>; <a href="http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/whatsapp-group-admin-you-are-intermediary-and-here%E2%80%99s-what-you-need-know-35031">http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/whatsapp-group-admin-you-are-intermediary-and-here%E2%80%99s-what-you-need-know-35031</a></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref11">[11]</a> https://www.whatsapp.com/legal/</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><a href="file:///C:/Users/HP/Desktop/Whatsapp%20group%20admins.docx#_ftnref12">[12]</a> http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/FileServer/2015-03-24_1427183283.pdf</p>
<div>
<div id="ftn12"></div>
</div>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-case-of-whatsapp-group-admins'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/the-case-of-whatsapp-group-admins</a>
</p>
No publisherJapreet GrewalIT ActIntermediary LiabilityCensorship2015-12-08T10:25:42ZBlog EntrySummary Report Internet Governance Forum 2015
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/summary-report-internet-governance-forum-2015
<b>Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), India participated in the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) held at Poeta Ronaldo Cunha Lima Conference Center, Joao Pessoa in Brazil from 10 November 2015 to 13 November 2015. The theme of IGF 2015 was ‘Evolution of Internet Governance: Empowering Sustainable Development’. Sunil Abraham, Pranesh Prakash & Jyoti Panday from CIS actively engaged and made substantive contributions to several key issues affecting internet governance at the IGF 2015. The issue-wise detail of their engagement is set out below. </b>
<p align="center" style="text-align: left;"><strong>INTERNET
GOVERNANCE</strong></p>
<p align="justify">
I. The
Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group to the IGF organised a discussion on
<em><strong>Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) and Internet Economy</strong></em><em>
</em>at
the Main Meeting Hall from 9:00 am to 12:30 pm on 11 November, 2015.
The
discussions at this session focused on the importance of Internet
Economy enabling policies and eco-system for the fulfilment of
different SDGs. Several concerns relating to internet
entrepreneurship, effective ICT capacity building, protection of
intellectual property within and across borders were availability of
local applications and content were addressed. The panel also
discussed the need to identify SDGs where internet based technologies
could make the most effective contribution. Sunil
Abraham contributed to the panel discussions by addressing the issue
of development and promotion of local content and applications. List
of speakers included:</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
Lenni
Montiel, Assistant-Secretary-General for Development, United Nations</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Helani
Galpaya, CEO LIRNEasia</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Sergio
Quiroga da Cunha, Head of Latin America, Ericsson</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Raúl
L. Katz, Adjunct Professor, Division of Finance and Economics,
Columbia Institute of Tele-information</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Jimson
Olufuye, Chairman, Africa ICT Alliance (AfICTA)</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Lydia
Brito, Director of the Office in Montevideo, UNESCO</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
H.E.
Rudiantara, Minister of Communication & Information Technology,
Indonesia</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Daniel
Sepulveda, Deputy Assistant Secretary, U.S. Coordinator for
International and Communications Policy at the U.S. Department of
State </p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Deputy
Minister Department of Telecommunications and Postal Services for
the republic of South Africa</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Sunil
Abraham, Executive Director, Centre for Internet and Society, India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
H.E.
Junaid Ahmed Palak, Information and Communication Technology
Minister of Bangladesh</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Jari
Arkko, Chairman, IETF</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Silvia
Rabello, President, Rio Film Trade Association</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Gary
Fowlie, Head of Member State Relations & Intergovernmental
Organizations, ITU</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify">
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">http</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">://</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">www</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">.</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">intgovforum</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">.</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">org</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">cms</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">igf</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">2015-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">main</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">sessions</a><u>
</u></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<u><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2327-2015-11-11-internet-economy-and-sustainable-development-main-meeting-room">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2327-2015-11-11-internet-economy-and-sustainable-development-main-meeting-room</a></u></p>
<p align="justify">
Video
link Internet
economy and Sustainable Development here
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6obkLehVE8">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6obkLehVE8</a></p>
<p align="justify"> II.
Public
Knowledge organised a workshop on <em><strong>The
Benefits and Challenges of the Free Flow of Data </strong></em>at
Workshop Room
5 from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm on 12 November, 2015. The discussions in
the workshop focused on the benefits and challenges of the free flow
of data and also the concerns relating to data flow restrictions
including ways to address
them. Sunil
Abraham contributed to the panel discussions by addressing the issue
of jurisdiction of data on the internet. The
panel for the workshop included the following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
Vint
Cerf, Google</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Lawrence
Strickling, U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIA</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Richard
Leaning, European Cyber Crime Centre (EC3), Europol</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Marietje
Schaake, European Parliament</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Nasser
Kettani, Microsoft</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Sunil
Abraham, CIS
India</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify">
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">http</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">://</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">www</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">.</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">intgovforum</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">.</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">org</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">cms</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">workshops</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">list</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">of</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">published</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">workshop</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">proposals</a><u>
</u></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2467-2015-11-12-ws65-the-benefits-and-challenges-of-the-free-flow-of-data-workshop-room-5">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2467-2015-11-12-ws65-the-benefits-and-challenges-of-the-free-flow-of-data-workshop-room-5</a></p>
<p align="justify">
Video link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtjnHkOn7EQ</p>
<p align="justify"> III.
Article
19 and
Privacy International organised a workshop on <em><strong>Encryption
and Anonymity: Rights and Risks</strong></em>
at Workshop Room 1 from 11:00 am to 12:30 pm on 12 November, 2015.
The
workshop fostered a discussion about the latest challenges to
protection of anonymity and encryption and ways in which law
enforcement demands could be met while ensuring that individuals
still enjoyed strong encryption and unfettered access to anonymity
tools. Pranesh
Prakash contributed to the panel discussions by addressing concerns
about existing south Asian regulatory framework on encryption and
anonymity and emphasizing the need for pervasive encryption. The
panel for this workshop included the following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
David
Kaye, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Juan
Diego Castañeda, Fundación Karisma, Colombia</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Edison
Lanza, Organisation of American States Special Rapporteur</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Pranesh
Prakash, CIS India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Ted
Hardie, Google</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Elvana
Thaci, Council of Europe</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Professor
Chris Marsden, Oxford Internet Institute</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Alexandrine
Pirlot de Corbion, Privacy International</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify"><a name="_Hlt435412531"></a>
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">http</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">://</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">www</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">.</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">intgovforum</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">.</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">org</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">cms</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">worksh</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">o</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">ps</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">/</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">list</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">of</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">published</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">workshop</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">-</a><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">proposals</a><u>
</u></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2407-2015-11-12-ws-155-encryption-and-anonymity-rights-and-risks-workshop-room-1">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2407-2015-11-12-ws-155-encryption-and-anonymity-rights-and-risks-workshop-room-1</a></p>
<p align="justify">
Video link available here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUrBP4PsfJo</p>
<p align="justify"> IV.
Chalmers
& Associates organised a session on <em><strong>A
Dialogue on Zero Rating and Network Neutrality</strong></em>
at the Main Meeting Hall from 2:00 pm to 4:00 pm on 12 November,
2015. The Dialogue provided access to expert insight on zero-rating
and a full spectrum of diverse
views on this issue. The Dialogue also explored alternative
approaches to zero rating such as use of community networks. Pranesh
Prakash provided
a
detailed explanation of harms and benefits related to different
approaches to zero-rating. The
panellists for this session were the following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
Jochai
Ben-Avie, Senior Global Policy Manager, Mozilla, USA</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Igor
Vilas Boas de Freitas, Commissioner, ANATEL, Brazil</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Dušan
Caf, Chairman, Electronic Communications Council, Republic of
Slovenia</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Silvia
Elaluf-Calderwood, Research Fellow, London School of Economics,
UK/Peru</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Belinda
Exelby, Director, Institutional Relations, GSMA, UK</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Helani
Galpaya, CEO, LIRNEasia, Sri Lanka</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Anka
Kovacs, Director, Internet Democracy Project, India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Kevin
Martin, VP, Mobile and Global Access Policy, Facebook, USA</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Pranesh
Prakash, Policy Director, CIS India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Steve
Song, Founder, Village Telco, South Africa/Canada</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Dhanaraj
Thakur, Research Manager, Alliance for Affordable Internet, USA/West
Indies</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Christopher
Yoo, Professor of Law, Communication, and Computer & Information
Science, University of Pennsylvania, USA</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify">
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions" target="_top">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/igf2015-main-sessions</a></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2457-2015-11-12-a-dialogue-on-zero-rating-and-network-neutrality-main-meeting-hall-2">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2457-2015-11-12-a-dialogue-on-zero-rating-and-network-neutrality-main-meeting-hall-2</a></p>
<p align="justify"> V.
The
Internet & Jurisdiction Project organised a workshop on
<em><strong>Transnational
Due Process: A Case Study in MS Cooperation</strong></em>
at Workshop Room
4 from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm on 13 November, 2015. The
workshop discussion focused on the challenges in developing an
enforcement framework for the internet that guarantees transnational
due process and legal interoperability. The discussion also focused
on innovative approaches to multi-stakeholder cooperation such as
issue-based networks, inter-sessional work methods and transnational
policy standards. The panellists for this discussion were the
following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
Anne
Carblanc Head of Division, Directorate for Science, Technology and
Industry, OECD</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Eileen
Donahoe Director Global Affairs, Human Rights Watch</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Byron
Holland President and CEO, CIRA (Canadian ccTLD)</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Christopher
Painter Coordinator for Cyber Issues, US Department of State</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Sunil
Abraham Executive Director, CIS India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Alice
Munyua Lead dotAfrica Initiative and GAC representative, African
Union Commission</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Will
Hudsen Senior Advisor for International Policy, Google</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Dunja
Mijatovic Representative on Freedom of the Media, OSCE</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Thomas
Fitschen Director for the United Nations, for International
Cooperation against Terrorism and for Cyber Foreign Policy, German
Federal Foreign Office</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Hartmut
Glaser Executive Secretary, Brazilian Internet Steering Committee</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Matt
Perault, Head of Policy Development Facebook</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify">
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals</a></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2475-2015-11-13-ws-132-transnational-due-process-a-case-study-in-ms-cooperation-workshop-room-4">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2475-2015-11-13-ws-132-transnational-due-process-a-case-study-in-ms-cooperation-workshop-room-4</a></p>
<p align="justify">
Video
link Transnational
Due Process: A Case Study in MS Cooperation available here <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9jVovhQhd0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9jVovhQhd0</a></p>
<p align="justify"> VI.
The Internet Governance Project organised a meeting of the
<em><strong>Dynamic
Coalition on Accountability of Internet Governance Venues</strong></em>
at Workshop Room 2 from 14:00
– 15:30 on
12 November, 2015. The coalition
brought together panelists to highlight the
challenges in developing an accountability
framework
for internet governance
venues that include setting up standards and developing a set of
concrete criteria. Jyoti Panday provided the perspective of civil
society on why acountability is necessary in internet governance
processes and organizations. The panelists for this workshop included
the following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Robin
Gross, IP Justice</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Jeanette
Hofmann, Director
<a href="http://www.internetundgesellschaft.de/">Alexander
von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society</a></p>
</li><li>
<p>
Farzaneh
Badiei,
Internet Governance Project</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Erika
Mann,
Managing
Director Public PolicyPolicy Facebook and Board of Directors
ICANN</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Paul
Wilson, APNIC</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Izumi
Okutani, Japan
Network Information Center (JPNIC)</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Keith
Drazek , Verisign</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Jyoti
Panday,
CIS</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Jorge
Cancio,
GAC representative</p>
</li></ol>
<p>
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://igf2015.sched.org/event/4c23/dynamic-coalition-on-accountability-of-internet-governance-venues?iframe=no&w=&sidebar=yes&bg=no">http://igf2015.sched.org/event/4c23/dynamic-coalition-on-accountability-of-internet-governance-venues?iframe=no&w=&sidebar=yes&bg=no</a></p>
<p>
Video
link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIxyGhnch7w</p>
<p> VII.
Digital
Infrastructure
Netherlands Foundation organized an open forum at
Workshop Room 3
from 11:00
– 12:00
on
10
November, 2015. The open
forum discussed the increase
in government engagement with “the internet” to protect their
citizens against crime and abuse and to protect economic interests
and critical infrastructures. It
brought
together panelists topresent
ideas about an agenda for the international protection of ‘the
public core of the internet’ and to collect and discuss ideas for
the formulation of norms and principles and for the identification of
practical steps towards that goal.
Pranesh Prakash participated in the e open forum. Other speakers
included</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>
Bastiaan
Goslings AMS-IX, NL</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Pranesh
Prakash CIS, India</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Marilia
Maciel (FGV, Brasil</p>
</li><li>
<p>
Dennis
Broeders (NL Scientific Council for Government Policy)</p>
</li></ol>
<p>
Detailed
description of the open
forum is available here
<a href="http://schd.ws/hosted_files/igf2015/3d/DINL_IGF_Open%20Forum_The_public_core_of_the_internet.pdf">http://schd.ws/hosted_files/igf2015/3d/DINL_IGF_Open%20Forum_The_public_core_of_the_internet.pdf</a></p>
<p>
Video
link available here <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joPQaMQasDQ">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joPQaMQasDQ</a></p>
<p>
VIII.
UNESCO, Council of Europe, Oxford University, Office of the High
Commissioner on Human Rights, Google, Internet Society organised a
workshop on hate speech and youth radicalisation at Room 9 on
Thursday, November 12. UNESCO shared the initial outcome from its
commissioned research on online hate speech including practical
recommendations on combating against online hate speech through
understanding the challenges, mobilizing civil society, lobbying
private sectors and intermediaries and educating individuals with
media and information literacy. The workshop also discussed how to
help empower youth to address online radicalization and extremism,
and realize their aspirations to contribute to a more peaceful and
sustainable world. Sunil Abraham provided his inputs. Other speakers
include</p>
<p>
1.
Chaired by Ms Lidia Brito, Director for UNESCO Office in Montevideo</p>
<p>
2.Frank
La Rue, Former Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression</p>
<p>
3.
Lillian Nalwoga, President ISOC Uganda and rep CIPESA, Technical
community</p>
<p>
4.
Bridget O’Loughlin, CoE, IGO</p>
<p>
5.
Gabrielle Guillemin, Article 19</p>
<p>
6.
Iyad Kallas, Radio Souriali</p>
<p>
7.
Sunil Abraham executive director of Center for Internet and Society,
Bangalore, India</p>
<p>
8.
Eve Salomon, global Chairman of the Regulatory Board of RICS</p>
<p>
9.
Javier Lesaca Esquiroz, University of Navarra</p>
<p>
10.
Representative GNI</p>
<p>
11.
Remote Moderator: Xianhong Hu, UNESCO</p>
<p>
12.
Rapporteur: Guilherme Canela De Souza Godoi, UNESCO</p>
<p>
Detailed
description of the workshop
is available here
<a href="http://igf2015.sched.org/event/4c1X/ws-128-mitigate-online-hate-speech-and-youth-radicalisation?iframe=no&w=&sidebar=yes&bg=no">http://igf2015.sched.org/event/4c1X/ws-128-mitigate-online-hate-speech-and-youth-radicalisation?iframe=no&w=&sidebar=yes&bg=no</a></p>
<p>
Video
link to the panel is available here
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIO1z4EjRG0">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIO1z4EjRG0</a></p>
<p> <strong>INTERMEDIARY
LIABILITY</strong></p>
<p align="justify">
IX.
Electronic
Frontier Foundation, Centre for Internet Society India, Open Net
Korea and Article 19 collaborated to organize
a workshop on the <em><strong>Manila
Principles on Intermediary Liability</strong></em>
at Workshop Room 9 from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm on 13 November 2015. The
workshop elaborated on the Manila
Principles, a high level principle framework of best practices and
safeguards for content restriction practices and addressing liability
for intermediaries for third party content. The
workshop
saw particpants engaged in over lapping projects considering
restriction practices coming togetehr to give feedback and highlight
recent developments across liability regimes. Jyoti
Panday laid down the key details of the Manila Principles framework
in this session. The panelists for this workshop included the
following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
Kelly
Kim Open Net Korea,</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Jyoti
Panday, CIS India,</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Gabrielle
Guillemin, Article 19,</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Rebecca
McKinnon on behalf of UNESCO</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Giancarlo
Frosio, Center for Internet and Society, Stanford Law School</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Nicolo
Zingales, Tilburg University</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Will
Hudson, Google</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify">
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals</a></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2423-2015-11-13-ws-242-the-manila-principles-on-intermediary-liability-workshop-room-9">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2423-2015-11-13-ws-242-the-manila-principles-on-intermediary-liability-workshop-room-9</a></p>
<p align="justify">
Video link available here <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFLmzxXodjs">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFLmzxXodjs</a></p>
<p align="justify"> <strong>ACCESSIBILITY</strong></p>
<p align="justify">
X.
Dynamic
Coalition
on Accessibility and Disability and Global Initiative for Inclusive
ICTs organised a workshop on <em><strong>Empowering
the Next Billion by Improving Accessibility</strong></em><em>
</em>at
Workshop Room 6 from 9:00 am to 10:30 am on 13 November, 2015. The
discussion focused on
the need and ways to remove accessibility barriers which prevent over
one billion potential users to benefit from the Internet, including
for essential services. Sunil
Abraham specifically spoke about the lack of compliance of existing
ICT infrastructure with well established accessibility standards
specifically relating to accessibility barriers in the disaster
management process. He discussed the barriers faced by persons with
physical or psychosocial disabilities. The
panelists for this discussion were the following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
Francesca
Cesa Bianchi, G3ICT</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Cid
Torquato, Government of Brazil</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Carlos
Lauria, Microsoft Brazil</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Sunil
Abraham, CIS India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Derrick
L. Cogburn, Institute on Disability and Public Policy (IDPP) for the
ASEAN(Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Region</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Fernando
H. F. Botelho, F123 Consulting</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Gunela
Astbrink, GSA InfoComm</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify">
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<u><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals</a></u></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<u><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2438-2015-11-13-ws-253-empowering-the-next-billion-by-improving-accessibility-workshop-room-3">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2438-2015-11-13-ws-253-empowering-the-next-billion-by-improving-accessibility-workshop-room-3</a></u></p>
<p align="justify">
Video
Link Empowering
the next billion by improving accessibility <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RZlWvJAXxs">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RZlWvJAXxs</a></p>
<p align="justify"> <strong>OPENNESS</strong></p>
<p align="justify">
XI.
A
workshop on <em><strong>FOSS
& a Free, Open Internet: Synergies for Development</strong></em>
was organized at Workshop Room 7 from 2:00 pm to 3:30 pm on 13
November, 2015. The discussion was focused on the increasing risk to
openness of the internet and the ability of present & future
generations to use technology to improve their lives. The panel shred
different perspectives about the future co-development
of FOSS and a free, open Internet; the threats that are emerging; and
ways for communities to surmount these. Sunil
Abraham emphasised the importance of free software, open standards,
open access and access to knowledge and the lack of this mandate in
the draft outcome document for upcoming WSIS+10 review and called for
inclusion of the same. Pranesh Prakash further contributed to the
discussion by emphasizing the need for free open source software with
end‑to‑end encryption and traffic level encryption based
on open standards which are decentralized and work through federated
networks. The
panellists for this discussion were the following.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p align="justify">
Satish
Babu, Technical Community, Chair, ISOC-TRV, Kerala, India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Judy
Okite, Civil Society, FOSS Foundation for Africa</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Mishi
Choudhary, Private Sector, Software Freedom Law Centre, New York</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Fernando
Botelho, Private Sector, heads F123 Systems, Brazil</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Sunil
Abraham, CIS
India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Pranesh
Prakash, CIS
India</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Nnenna
Nwakanma- WWW.Foundation</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Yves
MIEZAN EZO, Open Source strategy consultant</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Corinto
Meffe, Advisor to the President and Directors, SERPRO, Brazil</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Frank
Coelho de Alcantara, Professor, Universidade Positivo, Brazil</p>
</li><li>
<p align="justify">
Caroline
Burle, Institutional and International Relations, W3C Brazil Office
and Center of Studies on Web Technologies</p>
</li></ol>
<p align="justify">
Detailed
description of the workshop is available here
<u><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals" target="_top">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/workshops/list-of-published-workshop-proposals</a></u></p>
<p align="justify">
Transcript
of the workshop is available here
<u><a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2468-2015-11-13-ws10-foss-and-a-free-open-internet-synergies-for-development-workshop-room-7" target="_top">http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2468-2015-11-13-ws10-foss-and-a-free-open-internet-synergies-for-development-workshop-room-7</a></u></p>
<p align="justify">
Video
link available here <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwUq0LTLnDs">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwUq0LTLnDs</a></p>
<p align="justify">
<br /><br /></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/summary-report-internet-governance-forum-2015'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/summary-report-internet-governance-forum-2015</a>
</p>
No publisherjyotiAccess to KnowledgeBig DataFreedom of Speech and ExpressionEncryptionInternet Governance ForumIntermediary LiabilityAccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorshipCyber SecurityDigital GovernanceAnonymityCivil SocietyBlocking2015-11-30T10:47:13ZBlog Entry