So it's taken two years for the Indian Government to clarify what it meant by the IT Rules. It's a we-said-this-but-actually-we-meant-something-else moment for the Department of Information Technology. A notification put up recently on the website of the Department of Electronics and Information Technology states that when the government said in the IT Rules that Intermediaries"shall act within thirty six hours and where applicable, work with user or owner of such information to disable such information that is in contravention of sub-rule (2)", by the term "act" they meant that the Intermediary "shall respond or acknowledge to the complainant within thirty six hours of receiving the complaint/grievances about any such information as mentioned in sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 and initiate appropriate action as per law." There's an additional clarification, which is - from what I remember - not contained in the rules, and says that "the Grievance Officer of the intermediary shall redress such complaints promptly but in any case within one month from the date of receipt of complaint in accordance with sub-rule (11) of Rule 3." This was the clarification that was given to the Parliamentary Committee on Subordinate Legislation (the IT Rules are a subordinate legislation), and in opinion, this doesn't change the status of the IT Rules. What's missing? Changes to terms, to bring in specificity, increase transparency, establish a recourse, and limit the actions of intermediaries. We've explained these in detail here. The first reaction of most intermediaries which receive a complaint will be to…
- “Nothing to worry”: Chennai Police Justifies Use of Facial Recognition System on Random Citizens December 9, 2022
- MeitY to hold cybersecurity workshop for officials after ransomware attack on AIIMS-Delhi: Report December 9, 2022
- DoT to share a revised draft of the telecom bill in less than a month December 9, 2022
- Apple finally brings end-to-end encryption to iCloud Backups, Photos, and more December 9, 2022
- Protecting Personal Data: Where Grievance Redressal Falls Short December 9, 2022
MediaNama’s mission is to help build a digital ecosystem which is open, fair, global and competitive.
The provisions around grievance redressal in the Data Protection Bill "stands to be dangerously sparse and nugatory on various counts."
By Soujanya Sridharan and Dr. Sarayu Natarajan Platform work and data: the intersection Every time you use a ride-hailing app, the matching algorithm processes...
New bill narrows focus over predecessors that went heavy on data sovereignty, localisation and compliance. What explains this change?
The Structure and Style of a Dogma Community: Conspiracy theories and organized Twitter engagement on Sushant Singh Rajput
Studying the 'community' supporting the late Sushant Singh Rajput (SSR) shows how Twitter was gamed through organized engagement
Do we have an enabling system for the National Data Governance Framework Policy (NDGFP) aiming to create a repository of non-personal data?
Please subscribe to MediaNama. Don't share prints and PDFs.
You May Also Like
Google has released a Google Travel Trends Report which states that branded budget hotel search queries grew 179% year over year (YOY) in India, in...
135 job openings in over 60 companies are listed at our free Digital and Mobile Job Board: If you’re looking for a job, or...
Twitter takes down tweets from MP, MLA, editor criticising handling of pandemic upon government request
By Aroon Deep and Aditya Chunduru You’re reading it here first: Twitter has complied with government requests to censor 52 tweets that mostly criticised...