[Reader-list] Why censor the internet?

[Ram Bhat]

Dear all,

As you know our government has sought to amend the IT Act 2000, with new
rules,
and one of them is particularly interesting, and disturbing to say the
least.
It is titled "Information Technology (Due diligence observed by
intermediaries guidelines) Rules, 2011."

You can read the proposed amendment here:
http://www.mit.gov.in/sites/upload_files/dit/files/due_dilligance4intermediary07_02_11.pdf

Section 3 of the proposed rules, particularly point (g) should be of
interest:

*"causes annoyance or inconvenience or deceives or misleads the addressee
about the origin of such messages or communicates any **information which is
grossly offensive or menacing in nature;"*

<http://www.mit.gov.in/sites/upload_files/dit/files/due_dilligance4intermediary07_02_11.pdf>In
essence, the proposed amendment concerns Intermediaries, and the IT Act
defines them under clause (w) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 2 of the Act.
The definition is given below:

*"intermediary" with respect to any particular electronic message means any
person who *
*on behalf of another person receives, stores or transmits that message or
provides any service *
*with respect to that message*
*
*
Consider a group like the Hindu Janajagruti Samiti or HJS (
http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/11491.html), who decide that an ad on the
internet is hurting sentiments of Hindus. They will not only resort to
publishing details of the publisher (As they already have), they can now,
under the new rules (if passed), move the government to remove this content
under point (g) mentioned above. Annoyance and inconvenience has been
caused!

Until now, these battles have been fought on the internet itself...abuses
exchanges, debates self-organised. Remember the case of Pink Chaddi where
pink underwear, pink sarees and bangles were all exchanged and sent across
the length and breadth of the country with gleeful abandon. Facebook groups
were started, clicked on, hacked, and then ignored. That was, and currently
is the preferred mode of expressing - freedom and difference of opinion on
the internet. Ocassionally things do get out of hand, when our friends,
people like HJS start publishing details like office locations, numbers,
start calling ad companies and threaten to burn offices etc. But I digress.

The point is that we need to sit up and take notice of this proposed
amendment. It will affect not only the Facebooks and Googles of the world,
but also our own humble efforts on Wordpress and other such platforms.
Because anyone who has a blog or a site, becomes an intermediary. Through
this comment on intermediary, our government also has seen it fit to decide
what are the categories under which content can be censored..where are these
words coming from - annoying, inconvenience etc ? Will the Computer
Emergency Response Team (CERT) decide what is annoying?

We cannot rely merely on the present argument of "don't punish the
messenger". Efforts to hamper the messenger don't happen in vacuum. It
implies that the message which is being carried might be of some discomfort.
Otherwise why simply attack the messenger. You and I and many many people
currently are in the business of sending and receiving messages on the
internet today. To be more specific, 100 million users. Internet growth does
not hold a candle to mobile phone, but in less than 3-5 years, there will
not be much of a difference between the latter and the former. Current rural
teledensity is somewhere between 26-29%. Most of the people living in rural
India, who will probably access mobile phones (over the next few years) will
probably access it over 3G standards, with data access assured. So that's
close to 600-700 million people experiencing internet for the first time on
a mobile phone. There is bound to be an explosion of internet based
content.
The new Telecom policy 2011 is set for a release in April. The government
knows what is coming ahead, and these kind of amendments are just growing
signs of nervousness when it knows that it needs to control the rural
population.

The government doesn't care much for how the urban population responds or
what information it accesses. Cable TV, print etc, is largely unregulated.
Can't be regulated - for the sheer volume of content which passes through
daily. However, please note no news on radio - community radio or private
FM. Why? Because FM is free to air, and even the lowest income groups can
access it, either directly or through group listening. Now that can be
dangerous.

With the impending growth of telecom, the same situation looms silently. On
one hand, our government wants to create a rapid growth in internet access
and peer-to-peer content exchange amongst people who have no access (no
doubt this will be written in new telecom policy), but on the other hand, it
wants to create restrictive and disabling conditions even before people get
widespread access.

This paradoxical nature has to be brought out in to the open and fought for
what its worth. I hope that you find the time to go through the amendments,
and post in your thoughts.
Unfortunately, the last date for comments has already passed (28th Feb) but
please continue to absolutely flood the gates at this contact : grai AT
mit.gov.in <grai at mit.gov.in>

Complete tamasha can be seen at http://www.mit.gov.in/content/cyber-laws

Would love to hear your thoughts and comments on this issue as well.

best,
Ram