Media & Technology Laws: “Following” The Twitter Conflict

We had shared a note on the media law amendments which we had stated were “game-changing.”
 
We will navigate the bitter Twitter conflict on this very amendment here:
The Government of India has inter alia noted the following violations by Twitter in its press release dated May 27, 2021.
A. Non-appointment of an India-based grievance redressal officer and mechanism;
B. Non-appointment of a Chief Compliance Officer;
C. Non-appointment of a nodal office; and
D. Twitter’s refusal of the government order to block on Red Fort which the statement akins to the Capitol Hill incident.
 
This is released in a public statement- and is also ironically on the Twitter handle of the relevant ministry:
 
This press-note does not speak of encryption and data traceability.
Technically in our view, A-D is the “low-hanging fruit” of compliance. For context, this is an extract of our update note which links well into the current reality:
“The 2021 Rules impose a higher threshold of compliance mandates for “significant social media intermediaries”. In addition to the requirements in the table above, significant social intermediaries have to comply with the following:
1. Resident key officers: Appoint “employees” who are residents of India as (i) chief compliance officer; (ii) nodal contact person, and (iii) resident grievance officer. A grievance redressal mechanism, to receive complaints must allow the complainant to track the complaint. Additionally, it must provide reasons for action taken against the complaint, to the extent possible and a reasonable opportunity to be heard.
2. Compliance reports: Publish detailed monthly compliance reports on actions taken on content moderation, automated or otherwise.
3. Identification of originator: Enable identification of first originator of information upon receipt of a court or government order directing the same.
4. Filtering mechanisms: Deploy automated mechanisms (with “human oversight”) to identify child sexual abuse material, rape and removal of content that is a replication of previously removed content.”

DISCLAIMER

This is the official website of Verist Law.

The purpose of this website is to provide information about Verist Law.

This website is not intended to provide legal advice.

The content here should not be relied on as legal advice.

Accessing this website is not in relation to or arising out of advertisement or inducement.

Use of this website does not create a lawyer-client relationship.