The Delhi High Court has been hearing at least five copyright infringement cases against Telegram for over two years now. Filed by media and education companies, the encrypted platform is allegedly the preferred medium of choice to freely share copyrighted newspapers and exam prep materials. However, the companies are fighting back. While business and intellectual property interests are on the line, so are the privacy interests of Telegram's users. Why it matters: Telegram has revealed the identity of some of its users in these copyright infringement cases—which might shape future copyright cases too. While orders like these might aim to help companies protect hard-developed resources, they could also compromise the larger future of users choosing 'encrypted' platforms for privacy reasons. So, they raise two fundamental questions: do platforms need to reveal user identity to solve online copyright infringement cases? Why isn't taking down infringing material enough? Also: the Indian government hasn't always been gung-ho about anonymity online. As we reported back in September in its standoff with Twitter, it had this to say on anonymous netizens: [The petition stated that] anonymity is not a constitutionally guaranteed right, only the right to remain silent is. It criticises how anonymity is linked to right to privacy norms, arguing that this has led to adverse security outcomes online (such as the spread of misinformation and other user harms). 1. The case that changed it all: Neetu Singh v Telegram What happened?: Neetu Singh's teaching materials were uploaded to channels on Telegram. Unsurprisingly, she wanted them taken…
