wordpress blog stats
Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Mozilla calls proposed IT rule changes for intermediaries ‘blunt and disproportionate’

MeitY’s new proposed rules for intermediaries are “blunt and disproportionate solutions” to issues surrounding harmful online content, Mozilla Corporation said in a statement to MediaNama.

Free speech vs regulation: a fine balance

  1. Content pulldown: Mozilla emphasizes that the new rules propose that all intermediaries, including social media companies, e-commerce platforms, and ISPs, have to “proactively remove ‘unlawful’ user content”, or face consequences. The company says the requirement will eventually lead to “over-censorship and chill free expression.”

Amba Kak, public policy advisor at Mozilla, said that although there is a need for new ways to hold social media platforms to higher standards, the proposed law disproportionately weakens the present intermediary liability protections. “Any regulatory intervention on this complex issue must be preceded by a wide ranging and participatory consultation process,” she said in the statement.

2. Traceability and end-to-end encryption: The company also notes that the proposed amendments introduce a “sharp blow” to end-to-end encryption, which is used across platforms and apps. The proposed amendment includes a section which requires platforms to enable traceability, and hand over information to government bodies within 72 hours.

Mozilla is of the opinion that while harmful online content affects the overall health of the internet, there has to be a balance between regulation of online content, and fundamental rights and free speech guaranteed by the Constitution. “This is a delicate and critical balance, and not one that should be approached with hurried policy proposals,” says the statement.

Apart from the above, Mozilla lists its main concerns with the proposed amendments:

  1. “Automated and machine-learning solutions should not be encouraged as a silver bullet to fight against harmful content on the internet.”
  2. “One-size-fits-all obligations for all types of online services and all types of unlawful content is arbitrary and disproportionately harms smaller players.”
  3. “Requiring services to decrypt encrypted data, weakens overall security and contradicts the principles of data minimisation, endorsed in MeitY’s draft data protection bill.”
  4. “Disproportionate operational obligations, like mandatorily incorporating in India, are likely to spur market exit and deter market entry for SMEs.”

Proposed amendments

Here are the main proposed changes to the IT Rules, released by MeitY last week. These rules govern how intermediaries are to behave under Section 79.

  • Traceability, and information within 72 hours: The new rules require platforms to introduce traceability to find where a piece of information originated, and hand over information or assistance to government bodies in 72 hours, including in matters of security or cybersecurity, and for investigative purposes. [Rule 3(5)]
  • Platforms are required to be registered under the Companies Act, have a physical address in the country, a nodal officer who will cooperate with law enforcement agencies, etc. [Rule 3(7)]
  • Platforms have to pull down unlawful content within a shorter duration of 24 hours from the earlier 36 hours. They also have to keep records of the “unlawful activity” for 180 days – double the period of 90 days in the 2011 rules – as required by the court or government agencies [Rule 3(8)]
  • Platforms have to deploy tools to proactively identify, remove and disable public access to unlawful information or content. [Rule 3(9)]
  • The new rules insert a monthly requirement on platforms to inform users of the platforms’ right to terminate usage rights and to remove non-compliant information at their own discretion. [Rule 3(4)]

Note that the MeitY is seeking public comments on the proposed changes by January 15, 2019. Comments can be submitted to: Gccyberlaw[at]meity[dot]gov[dot]in OR  Pkumar[at]meity[dot]gov[dot]in OR dhawal[at]gov[dot]in

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Written By

I cover health, policy issues such as intermediary liability, data governance, internet shutdowns, and more. Hit me up for tips.

MediaNama’s mission is to help build a digital ecosystem which is open, fair, global and competitive.



Looking at the definition of health data, it is difficult to verify whether health IDs are covered by the Bill.


The accession to the Convention brings many advantages, but it could complicate the Brazilian stance at the BRICS and UN levels.


In light of the state's emerging digital healthcare apparatus, how does Clause 12 alter the consent and purpose limitation model?


The collective implication of leaving out ‘proportionality’ from Clause 12 is to provide very wide discretionary powers to the state.


The latest draft is also problematic for companies or service providers that have nothing to with children's data.

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...


Rajesh Kumar* doesn’t have many enemies in life. But, Uber, for which he drives a cab everyday, is starting to look like one, he...


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...

MediaNama is the premier source of information and analysis on Technology Policy in India. More about MediaNama, and contact information, here.

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ

Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Your email address:*
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ