[This piece has been authored by Anushruti Shah, a fourth-year law student at the Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur]
Introduction
Category: Surveillance
The Internet and Marginalised Genders: A Comment in view of the Intermediary Guidelines, 2021
[Varsha Singh is a fifth-year law student and contributing editor at robos of Tech Law and Policy, a platform for marginalized genders in the technology law and policy field. This essay is part of an ongoing collaboration between r – TLP and the NALSAR Tech Law Forum Blog and is the third post in the series. Previous entries can be found here.]
We live an increasingly online everyday life. Today, internet platforms are at the helm of conversations, dominating interactions and impacting relationships between social actors. These platforms’ power and control play a role in furthering fundamental values such as the right to communication and access to knowledge and information. Policies that govern this control, both at self-regulatory and state levels, should ensure the protection of such rights and freedoms while ensuring that users can reap these platforms’ benefits. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology recently published Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 to regulate intermediaries. While these guidelines adversely affect users’ rights and freedoms in general, the adverse effect is amplified manifold when it comes to marginalised genders, especially in light of India’s socio-political and cultural contexts.
Data Exploitation and Discrimination Through “Empowering” Femtech Apps
[The following post has been authored by Yashaswini Santuka, a third year student of NALSAR University of Law. This essay is part of an ongoing collaboration between r – TLP and the NALSAR Tech Law Forum Blog and is the second post in the series. The first entry can be found here, and the rest of series is available here.]
Female healthcare and technology related to it, like other women-centric issues, are often suppressed and kept away from the spotlight. This is the result of years of direct and indirect suppression of women and their autonomy (bodily or otherwise), which has results in an increase in the popularity of technology aimed at “empowering” women. However, if the goal of tech-empowered, health tracking apps is to enable people to make informed medical choices, femtech companies have built apps that go beyond this goal. They have managed to successfully blur the line between healthcare and technology, going so far as to becoming apps designed primarily for men and violating the privacy of those it was meant to benefit. This article seeks to address the blatantly discriminatory nature of these apps, the privacy issues that come with entering data into the apps and the legal protection that users are entitled to.
A Surveillance Story
[This post has been authored by Ada Shaharbanu and Reuel Davis Wilson.]
Our familiarity with surveillance generally brings to mind the methods adopted in the 20th century. Common among these are the tapping of telephone lines, stakeouts and the interception of postal services. However, it becomes difficult to keep a track of the multiplicity of ways in which surveillance is presently conducted. Advanced technology has barely allowed us to familiarize ourselves with one thing before the next comes along.
Metadata by TLF: Issue 15
Welcome to our fortnightly newsletter, where our reporters Kruttika Lokesh and Dhananjay Dhonchak put together handpicked stories from the world of tech law! You can find other issues here.
PIL filed seeking identities of content moderation officers
Former RSS ideologue K N Govindacharya filed a public-interest litigation in the High Court of Delhi to prompt Google, Twitter and Facebook to disclose identities of designated content moderation officers on the basis of the Information Technology Rules. In response, Google submitted that the officers worked with government authorities to remove illegal content. Govindacharya claimed that without disclosure of the officers’ identities, no mechanisms to enforce obligations could not be adequately instituted. However, Google responded by stating that revealing the identities of officers would jeopardize their capacity to work efficiently with the government, as they would be exposed to public scrutiny and criticism.
Metadata by TLF: Issue 13
Welcome to our fortnightly newsletter, where our reporters Kruttika Lokesh and Dhananjay Dhonchak put together handpicked stories from the world of tech law! You can find other issues here. [Ed Note: This newsletter has been prepared by Dhananjay Dhonchak and Sanchit Khandelwal]
Paytm approaches Delhi HC alleging lack of action by telecom companies against phishing
Paytm has knocked the doors of the Delhi High Court complaining that the telecom operators are not taking action against fraudsters carrying out phishing activities under Paytm’s name. The petitioner has claimed that its users are being duped using unsolicited commercial communications (UCC) in the form of SMS or voice calls made over telecom companies’ networks.
Metadata by TLF: Issue 12
Metadata by TLF: Issue 9
India’s 5G Trial: The Case for Huawei’s Exclusion
[This post has been authored by Sarthak Gupta of the Institute of Law, Nirma University.]
5G is the next big change awaiting mankind. It is not just an incremental change but rather represents a paradigm shift in technology. Among other things, it is going to have a huge impact on the national and economic security of countries. As a result, a safe and reliable framework for the development of 5G technology is very much critical for a nation’s ability to preserve its sovereignty.
Metadata by TLF: Issue 7
Welcome to our fortnightly newsletter, where our Editors put together handpicked stories from the world of tech law! You can find other issues here.
Israel spyware ‘Pegasus’ used to snoop on Indian activists, journalists, lawyers
In a startling revelation, Facebook owned messaging app WhatsApp revealed that a spyware known as ‘Pegasus’ has been used to target and surveil Indian activists and journalists. The revelation came to light after WhatsApp filed a lawsuit against the Israeli NSO Group, accusing it of using servers located in the US and elsewhere to send malware to approximately 1400 mobile phones and devices. On its part, the NSO group has consistently claimed that it sells its software only to government agencies, and that it is not used to target particular subjects. The Indian government sought a detailed reply from WhatsApp but has expressed dissatisfaction with the response received, with the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology stating that the reply has “certain gaps” which need to be further investigated.
Further reading:
- Sukanya Shantha, Indian Activists, Lawyers Were ‘Targeted’ Using Israeli Spyware Pegasus, The Wire (31 October 2019).
- Seema Chishti, WhatsApp confirms: Israeli spyware was used to snoop on Indian journalists, activists, The Indian Express (1 November 2019).
- Aditi Agrawal, Home Ministry gives no information to RTI asking if it bought Pegasus spyware, Medianama (1 November 2019).
- Shruti Dhapola, Explained: What is Israeli spyware Pegasus, which carried out surveillance via WhatsApp?, The Indian Express (2 November 2019).
- Akshita Saxena, Pegasus Surveillance: All You Want To Know About The Whatsapp Suit In US Against Israeli Spy Firm [Read Complaint], LiveLaw (12 November 2019).
RBI raises concerns over WhatsApp Pay
Adding to the WhatsApp’s woes in India, just after the Israeli spyware Pegasus hacking incident, The RBI has asked the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) not to permit WhatsApp to go ahead with the full rollout of its payment service WhatsApp Pay. The central bank has expressed concerns over WhatsApp’s non-compliance with data processing regulations, as current regulations allow for data processing outside India on the condition that it returns to servers located in the country without copies being left on foreign servers.
Further Reading:
- Karan Choudhury & Neha Alawadhi, WhatsApp Pay clearance: RBI raises concerns data localisation concerns with NPCI, Business Standard (7 November 2019).
- Aditi Agarwal, ‘No payment services on WhatsApp without data localisation’, RBI to SC, Medianama (9 October 2019).
- Sujata Sangwan, WhatsApp can’t start payments business in India, YOURSTORY (9 November, 2019).
- Yatti Soni, WhatsApp Payments India Launch May Get Delayed Over Data Localisation Concerns, Inc42 (9 October 2019).
- Priyanka Pani, Bleak future for messaging app WhatsApp’s payment future in India, IBS Intelligence (9 November 2019).
Kenya passes new Data Protection Law
The Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta recently approved a new data protection law in conformity with the standards set by the European Union. The new bill was legislated after it was found that existing data protection laws were not at par with the growing investments from foreign firms such as Safaricom and Amazon. There was growing concern that tech giants such as Facebook and Google would be able to collect and utilise data across the African subcontinent without any restrictions and consequently violate the privacy of citizens. The new law has specific restrictions on the manner in which personally identifiable data can be handled by the government, companies and individuals, and punishment for violations can to penalties of three million shillings or levying of prison sentences.
Further reading:
- Duncan Miriri, Kenya Passes Data Protection Law Crucial for Tech Investments, Reuters (8 November 2019).
- Yomi Kazeem, Kenya’s Stepping Up Its Citizens’ Digital Security with a New EU-Inspired Data Protection Law, Quartz Africa (12 November 2019).
- Kenn Abuya, The Data Protection Bill 2019 is Now Law. Here is What that Means for Kenyans, Techweez (8 November 2019).
- Kenya Adds New Data Regulations to Encourage Foreign Tech Entrants, Pymnts (10 November 2019).
Google gains access to healthcare data of millions through ‘Project Nightingale’
Google has been found to have gained access data to the healthcare data of millions through its partnership with healthcare firm Ascension. The venture, named ‘Project Nightingale’ allows Google to access health records, names and addresses without informing patients, in addition to other sensitive data such as lab results, diagnoses and records of hospitalisation. Neither doctors nor patients need to be told that Google an access the information, though the company has defended itself by stating that the deal amounts to “standard practice”. The firm has also stated that it does not link patient data with its own data repositories, however this has not stopped individuals and rights groups from raising privacy concerns.
Further reading:
- Trisha Jalan, Google’s Project Nightingale collects millions of Americans health records, Medianama (12 November 2019).
- Ed Pilkington, Google’s secret cache of medical data includes names and full details of millions – whistleblower, The Guardian (12 November 2019).
- James Vincent, The problem with Google’s health care ambitions is that no one knows where they end, The Verge (12 November 2019).
- Rop Copeland & Sarah E. needlemen, Google’s ‘Project Nightingale’ Triggers Federal Inquiry, Wall Street Journal (12 November 2019).
Law professor files first ever lawsuit against facial recognition in China
Law professor Guo Bing sued the Hangzhou Safari Park after it suddenly made facial recognition registration a mandatory requirement for visitor entrance. The park had previously used fingerprint recognition to allow entry, however it switched to facial recognition as part of the Chinese government’s aggressive rollout of the system meant to boost security and enhance consumer convenience. While it has been speculated that the lawsuit might be dismissed if pursued, it has stirred conversations among citizens over privacy and surveillance issues which it is hoped will result in reform of existing internet laws in the nation.
Further reading:
- Xue Yujie, Chinese Professor Files Landmark Suit Against Facial Recognition, Sixth Tone (4 November 2019).
- Michael Standaert, China wildlife park sued for forcing visitors to submit to facial recognition scan, The Guardian (4 November 2019).
- Kerry Allen, China facial recognition: Law professor sues wildlife park, BBC (8 November 2019).
- Rita Liao, China Roundup: facial recognition lawsuit and cashless payments for foreigners, TechCrunch (10 November 2019).
Twitter to ban all political advertising
Twitter has taken the decision to ban all political advertising, in a move that increases pressure on Facebook over its controversial stance to allow politicians to advertise false statements. The policy was announced via CEO Jack Dorsey’s account on Wednesday, and will apply to all ads relating to elections and associated political issues. However, the move may only to prove to have symbolic impact, as political ads on Twitter are just a fraction of those on Facebook in terms of reach and impact.
Further reading:
- Julie Wong, Twitter to ban all political advertising, raising pressure on Facebook, The Guardian (30 October 2019).
- Makena Kelly, Twitter will ban all political advertising starting in November, The Verge (30 October 2019).
- Amol Rajan, Twitter to ban all political advertising, BBC (31 October 2019).
- Alex Kantrowitz, Twitter Is Banning Political Ads. But It Will Allow Those That Don’t Mention Candidates Or Bills., BuzzFeed News (11 November 2019).