Dear Sir,

Just now read your email on the subject. To avoid any sort of
arguments, writing to you privately about what I feel its implications
should be as far as our group is concerned. My analysis is based on
section 66A, in which I have covered what type of information is
prescribed in this section, and its applicability as per the act. Then
comes the definition of intermediaries as applicable to us, followed
by the guidelines which prescribes due diligence on part of the
intermediaries under Rule 3. Subrules (2), (3) and (4) are very
important. It is little long email, so you may please adjust it
accordingly. Skip the section 66A part if needed.

If an analysis of section 66A is done, then it deals with 3 things:

1. Any information which is grossly offensive, or which is menacing in
character.
Since the terms offensive and menacing have no definitions in this
act, the general definitions are to be adopted. In that sense, what is
offensive in nature is declared by Indian Law, mainly Indian Penal
Code and Criminal Procedure Code.
The term menacing is nowhere defined so dictionary meaning shall
prevail, which should mean that the information should be such which
should be threatening in nature.

2. Clause B is self-explanatory, which says that any information which
is known to the person sending being false, but it is being sent to
cause the stated effects as mentioned in that clause.

3. Clause (c), deals with such emails which either cause stated
effects such as annoyance or inconvenience, or which mislead the
person receiving at the other end about its origen.

The section is applicable to the person who is the sender, and none else.

Now comes our part, the intermediaries part.

The definition of intermediaries in section 2 (1) (w) of the principle
act is clearly applicable to us as we are receiving information on
behalf of the other person and transmitting the same.

We are exempted from the originator part as defined under Section 2
(1) (za), hence section 66A is not applicable to us in any case (even
by stretch of imagination of crooked lawyers).

Now, the guidelines:

(1) This sub-rule clearly prescribes that the intermediary should have
published its rules privacy policy user access agreement etc. In that
sense, we have the list guidelines. I don't know whether those are the
part of the welcome email or not, but for safer side in order to come
under the term 'publish', I recommend it to be put up on our main page
of joining itself.

(2): This is the main rule which prescribes that:
The intermediary shall inform the user of the computer resource .....
not to transmit, host, display, share and publish.... any information
as prescribed in various sub-clauses thereafter.

(3) The intermediary shall not **knowingly** host, publish, initiate
the transmition of such information.

Exception (saving clause for us):                (a) temporary or
transient or intermediate storage of information automatically within
the computer resource as an intrinsic feature of such computer
resource, involving no exercise of any human editorial control, for
onward transmission or communication to another computer resource;

Thus, the mailing software being automated, the transmition of such
information is not applicable to us as we are not intervening.

Second saving clause:                 (b) removal of access to any
information, data or communication link by an intermediary after such
information, data or communication link comes to the actual knowledge
of a person authorised by the intermediary pursuant to any order or
direction as per the provisions of the act;

Thus, unless there is any order issued under this act by the
authorities, or any direction given in that behalf, we are safe. (but
read below, the next subrule imposes the obligation on us)

Work to be done as a moderator under sub-rule (4) by deleting the
message from archives which violates subrule 2, if it is in your
actual knowledge or is being brought to your knowledge **in writing**
or by a **digitally signed email**, then the information is to be
removed within 36 hours. Which shall be then preserved for 90 days for
investigation purposes.

As it is already done, you have to keep the users informed that any
information in violation of this rule will be removed and the user's
rights will be terminated.

A best suggestion is to include a small note in the signature stating
that violation of list guidelines and any act / rules which are
applicable to us (or mention the name) will result in termination of
user and removal of such information.

I have not gone through Information Technology (Reasonable security
practices and procedures and sensitive personal Information) Rules,
2011. So I cannot say whether they have any obligation on us to keep
our systems in what way secure to avoid transmition of such
information. If required, I can look into it. I hope, that whatever
little knowledge I have, according to that I have been able to address
your concerns satisfactorily. I will be more than happy to give my
interpretations or discuss anything if required. And would also look
forward for correction of my knowledge wherever I have gone wrong.

Regards,
-- 
Amar Jain.
Website: www.amarjain.com

Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of 
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in


Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe send a message to
[email protected]
with the subject unsubscribe.

To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please 
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in

Reply via email to