3 ms·
Only the largest social media companies will be able to comply with these laws. Assuming the summary isn't incorrect, these requirements are incredibly difficul
by KingMachiavelli 6y ago
Only the largest social media companies will be able to comply with these laws. Assuming the summary isn't incorrect, these requirements are incredibly difficult to implement for small companies.
Automated Filtering, Social Media User Verification, Traceability of Encrypted Content are all complex on both a technical & practical level. As I understand, setting up a basic mastodon instance or even just an IRC server could be in violation of these rules. (IRC might not count itself but hosting IRC and a web IRC gateway probably is).
Some interesting parts (scroll down in the PDF to get the English version):
> `social media intermediary‘ means an intermediary which primarily or solely enables online interaction between two or more users and allows them to create, upload, share, disseminate, modify or access information using its services;
This means that a lot of this law applies to basically any communication platform. Not just the big ones.
> Provided also that where the first originator of any information on the computer resource of an intermediary is located outside the territory of India, the first originator of that information within the territory of India shall be deemed to be the first originator of the information for the purpose of this clause.
This puts enormous liability on tons of services & businesses. Running a tor relay and many other 'network over a network' type technologies will become problematic. Forget about running a tor exit node - unless you can just say that this IP is the originator.
> where an intermediary collects information from a user for registration on the computer resource, it shall retain his information for a period of one hundred and eighty days after any cancellation or withdrawal of his registration, as the case may be;
So now you have to wait 180 days for your information to really be removed. So much for privacy. It's also a bit weird in that it is exactly 180 days and not up to or at least which makes it a bit confusing in what its goal is.
> The intermediary shall prominently publish on its website,mobile based application or both, as the case may be, the name of the Grievance Officer and his contact details as well as mechanism by which a user or a victim may make complaint against violation of the provisions of this rule or any other matters pertaining to the computer resources made available by it, and the Grievance Officer shall [...]
So you'll need about 3-5 employees just for hosting a image board, etc.
> [Section 4] [...] appoint a nodal contact person for 24x7 coordination with law enforcement agencies and officers to ensure compliance to their orders or requisitions made in accordance with the provisions of law or rules made thereunder.
> [Section 6] The Ministry may by order, for reasons to be recorded in writing, require any intermediary, which is not a significant social media intermediary, to comply with all or any of the obligations mentioned under rule 4, if the services of that intermediary permits the publication or transmission of information in a manner that may create a material risk of harm to the sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order.
So the government can basically force any communication platform/service to have a 24/7 contact/staff for cooperating with law enforcement. Essentially, any low moderation platform could be forced overnight to higher additional staff or more likely; shut down since it would be no longer economical or worthwhile to operate.
- wornohaulus 6y agothat's correct .. if you want to make a buck here.. comply ..if a drug company has regulations in each country of sale.. then so should digital media .. especially when news can be created and be produced and spread across to a similar effect in general population.. I am just another vegan internet consumer .. I want to know where my next batch of tofurkey is coming from !! so you know .. we can be sure that no jacks and joes were harmed during making of it !!
- oarsinsync 6y ago> So now you have to wait 180 days for your information to really be removed. So much for privacy. It's also a bit weird in that it is exactly 180 days and not up to or at least which makes it a bit confusing in what its goal is. "Up to 180 days" can result in data being deleted sooner. If data retention is a cost centre rather than a profit centre, the data will be deleted immediately. "At least 180 days" can result in data never being deleted, for the same reasons as above. 180 days exactly gives the appearance that there's a balance that has been struck between data retention and privacy. Determining whether or not this is actually meaningful is dependent on what the data is used for, etc. and I don't have enough knowledge of the subject to make an educated guess.
- unishark 6y agoSeems like that would be interpreted as "at least" to me. Where do they say it must be deleted after the 180 days?
- namibj 6y agoE.g. under GDPR (yes, I know that law likely doesn't apply to this), you need to have a legitimate interest or consent to collect/retain personal information. You don't have to instantly scrub it from your storage, but this 180 day rule would force you to delete it shortly after the 180 days are up, probably within a couple weeks.