Ed. Note: This post by Arvind Pennathur is a part of the TLF Editorial Board Test 2018
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it.”
A student-run group at NALSAR University of Law
Ed. Note: This post by Arvind Pennathur is a part of the TLF Editorial Board Test 2018
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to death your right to say it.”
In this second edition of The Week That Was, we find…
The Supreme Court of India in a welcome decision today held that Privacy is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 in Part III of the Constitution in a unanimous 9-0 decision.
Detailed comments will come soon.
In this first edition of The Week That Was, we find…
The age of digital communications with all its power to reach people instantly, anywhere on the globe, still has shortcomings. The instant communications happening all around us through laptops or mobiles involve two crucial processes i.e. encryption and decryption. These two processes are fundamental to the transfer of our voice and messages to the designated recipient anywhere around the world. While data resides on our devices or when it is being transferred, it is susceptible to interception by government or any other third party. Government intercepts these signals of communications, of the people suspected of wrongdoing with judicial permissions but this ability of the governments to gather intel by intercepting communications has hit a wall with the mass use of end-to-end encryption. The E2EE makes it highly improbable if not impossible to intercept such transmission and here lies the bone of contention between law enforcement and the public use of end-to-end encryption.
In a post-Snowden world, there has been relatively more awareness and interest in the right to privacy regarding digital communications; and in knowing when the government can snoop-in on personal conversations. A majority of the communications taking place today are digital and involve two crucial processes i.e. encryption and decryption. Encryption (which is conversion of information into a code) happens when a message/call is initiated. At the same time, decryption (conversion of code back into useful information) happens when the message/call is received by the recipient. There are multiple nuances in this process; both in the technological aspect and the legal aspect.
India is at the third position in a list with some of the most ‘democratic’ countries like Syria, Saudi Arabia, etc. Internet shutdowns can have some serious free speech and free association implications, which is why it is necessary to have clear and precise regulations to ensure that this power is not used arbitrarily and unreasonably.
The internet has grown from being just a communication medium to becoming a marketplace, an entertainment source, a news centre, and much more. At any given moment, there are thousands of gigabytes of information travelling across the planet. But all of this comes to a standstill when the internet shuts down. An internet shutdown is a government-enforced blanket restriction on the use of internet in a region for a particular period of time. The reasons vary from a law and order situation to a dignitary visiting the place. There is a requirement for an analysis into whether such shutdowns can be justified, even on the direst of grounds.
This article is an analysis of the newly passed ‘Regulation on Privacy and Electronic Communications’ passed by the European Union.
A huge part of our daily life now revolves around the usage of websites and communication mediums like Facebook, WhatsApp, Skype, etc. The suddenness with which these services have become popular left law-making authorities with little opportunity to give directions to these companies and regulate their actions. For the large part these services worked on the basis of self-regulation and on the terms and conditions which consumers accepted. These services gave people access to their machinery for free, in return for personal data about the consumer. This information is later sold to advertisers who later on send ‘personalised’ advertisements to the consumer on the basis of the information received.
An explanation of the regulatory and policy approaches analysed by the TRAI in their Consultation Paper
Virtual Reality is the latest buzz in the technological sphere, especially with the arrival of VR devices like headsets from giants like Facebook (Oculus Rift), Sony (PlayStation VR) and HTC (Vive). It is a relatively old concept (Aspen Movie Map was the first example, created by MIT in 1978) but with advancement in contemporary technologies, virtual reality has progressed by leaps and bounds in its effectiveness i.e. from being a mere 3-D image to an immersive and interactive system. Apart from its use in gaming and other entertainment purposes, it has been proposed to use this technology in another rather unexpected facet that of judicial proceedings.
Prior to the use of the technology it is important to analyse the concerns regarding the technology in question in a courtroom setting. The concerns are multifold: the manipulation of facts regarding the actual scene of crime/accident, time delay in court proceedings, cost of the expensive procedure and the possibility of manipulation of the trier of facts (judge/jury) i.e. inducing bias. While all of these are relevant questions regarding the use of virtual reality in courtrooms, each of the above concerns can be mitigated.
In the case briefs of Myriad Genetics vs Associated Molecular Pathology, amongst the several moving stories of victims of gene patents, contained the story of Abigail, a 10-year-old with a long QT syndrome, a serious heart condition that, if left untreated, could result in sudden death. A company in this case had obtained patent on two genes associated with this condition and developed a test to diagnose the syndrome. But then they went bankrupt and never offered such tests. Another lab tried to offer the test to Abigail, but the previous company which held the patent to such diagnosis threatened to sue the lab for patent infringement. So as a result, for 2 years, no test was available. During that time, Abigail died of undiagnosed long QT.
In 1790, the US Government started issuing patents under Patents Act 1790, with the motive of “Encouraging Arts and Sciences”. These intellectual property rights slowly became the biggest statutory safeguards of research and investment in a democracy. Edible business cards, nicotine infused coffee, a rock-paper-scissors card game for people too lazy to use their hands and finally thong diapers which make up the list of some rather amusing patents the USPTO has issued to protect intellectual property.