Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Wikipedia

Wikimedia Says It is Deeply Concerned About India's Proposed Intermediary Liability Rules (techcrunch.com) 50

An anonymous reader shares a report: Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit group that operates Wikipedia and a number of other projects, has urged the Indian government to rethink the proposed changes to the nation's intermediary liability rules that would affect swathes of companies and the way more than half a billion people access information online. The organization has also urged the Indian government to make public the latest proposed changes to the intermediary rules so that all stakeholders have a chance to participate in a "robust and informed debate about how the internet should be governed in India."

India proposed changes to intermediary rules in late December last year and it is expected to approve it in the coming months. Under the proposal, the Indian Ministry of Electronics and IT requires "intermediary" apps -- which as per its definition, includes any service with more than 5 million users -- to set up a local office and have a senior executive in the nation who can be held responsible for any legal issues. Amanda Keton, general counsel of Wikimedia Foundation, said on Thursday that India's proposed changes to the intermediary rules may have serious impact on Wikipedia's business -- as it operates an open editing model that relies on users to contribute new articles and make changes to existing articles on Wikipedia -- as well as those of other organizations.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wikimedia Says It is Deeply Concerned About India's Proposed Intermediary Liability Rules

Comments Filter:
  • by ethanms ( 319039 ) on Friday December 27, 2019 @07:21AM (#59561328)

    Their options are are to do nothing when the rules aren't followed, and be seen as impotent blow Garda...

    Or, they can ban services and organizations that refuse to follow their draconian rules that require the creation of an India based executive roles and offices, but will only serve xenophobic interests and further hinder India's standing on the global stage.

    As they say, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar...

    India should be working to make their country somewhere that these organizations _want_ to set up shop. Better infrastructure, codifying fairness for all (and creating globally acceptable laws), crack down on folks behaving by an old set of cultural standards and laws, create paths where all of the population can do more than exist but can actually build and grow. Given their environmental issues, and relatively low of labor, they could be at the forefront of renewable manufacturing and technology.

    • by Antique Geekmeister ( 740220 ) on Friday December 27, 2019 @07:46AM (#59561366)

      It's not clear that the laws are "draconian". Having a valid local contact address so that companies can be held liable and brought to court for abuses is an understandable goal. Holding a company accountable for client abuse, for stealing from their clients, for illegally spamming them, or for illegally sharing client data is awkward if not impossible. Have you a better suggestion to keep them accessible for lawsuits from clients or prosecution for criminal activity?

      • by athmanb ( 100367 ) on Friday December 27, 2019 @09:00AM (#59561568)

        It's more because of specific issues that apply to an encyclopedia. If everybody demands a local director that can be held liable for crimes, then Wikipedia has to hire a Russian manager to go to jail for gay propaganda. A Chinese one for illegally claiming that something happened on Tiananmen Square in 1989. A Turkish one for making up a genocide that absolutely definitely never existed. And an Indian one for claiming that Jammu & Kashmir is in a problematic situation.

        With every government including democratic ones setting up Truth Committees it's going to be a terrible nightmare for Wikipedia if they have to respect every country's laws.

        • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
          Thats would be the same for any nation a company has staff in.
          Dont want that? Stay in the USA with full legal protection and upload free "data" to the world.
          Let the world use a computer network to request data from a US server.
          100% staff in the USA and its all about US law.
          For what ever freedom of the press, freedom of speech, freedom after speech grants.
          The state and federal laws on been an internet publisher in the USA...

          Hire staff in Russia and face Russian laws...
          New Zealand? Ireland? Canada?
        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Didn't read the law but does it even apply here? For stuff like apps it's easy enough to have them removed from local app stores if they don't comply with local laws.

      • by Shotgun ( 30919 ) on Friday December 27, 2019 @09:24AM (#59561636)

        It's not clear that the laws are "draconian".

        However, it is abundantly clear that the law is ridiculous and unenforceable. Every law should be required to have an answer to the question, "What happens when no one complies?" What will India do when they call out various volunteers throughout the world for writing articles they don't like, and the volunteers respond with, "What? Who are you? How about you go get bent?" ?

      • by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

        It's not clear that the laws are "draconian". Having a valid local contact address so that companies can be held liable and brought to court for abuses is an understandable goal.

        Other countries have figured this out [legalzoom.com] without requiring local offices, and more to the point local executives (hostages) that can be jailed without the trouble of demonstrating that they themselves are culpable for the actions involved.

        Holding a company accountable for client abuse, for stealing from their clients, for illegally spa

        • by tepples ( 727027 )

          with no assets or offices or executives in the jurisdiction, why would any company be fool enough to comply with this law either?

          In order not to be blocked by the counterpart to China's Great Firewall.

          • In order not to be blocked by the counterpart to China's Great Firewall.

            Then they can work on circumventing the blockage. Let's make the internet more bulletproof.

    • Solution Pick a dirt poor untouchable starting with the letter S - and upgrade Him to a tin shed with permanent power for an email relay in a corrupt provence where the police accept facilitation payments, Remember all those women tourist victims - and its still a talkfest with no real action. Lets say their priorities are all wrong.
  • Wikimedia doesn't want it, all while trying to be the encyclopedia reference for the world, well too bad - more countries should do this.
    • Re:Accountability. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Shotgun ( 30919 ) on Friday December 27, 2019 @09:19AM (#59561620)

      Good luck with enforcing the rule. Wikimedia may WANT to be the encyclopedia reference for the world, but there is nothing that forces you or I to give them any credence whatsoever. It is just another website where nobody knows the author is a dog.

    • by eth1 ( 94901 )

      Wikimedia doesn't want it, all while trying to be the encyclopedia reference for the world, well too bad - more countries should do this.

      The problem is countries like China that would hold Wikipedia "accountable" for publishing "lies" about something like Tiananmen Square that, according to the Chinese government, never actually happened.

      If you want to publish truth, you have to *avoid* having physical presence in countries like that (which, unfortunately, is pretty much anywhere these days)

    • more countries should do this.

      Well, maybe if the regulators are held accountable, you might get your wish. There's too much corruption in government to allow them to define and enforce "accountability".

      It is far better to make the internet more resistant against interference, circumvent the blockades.

  • by Shotgun ( 30919 ) on Friday December 27, 2019 @09:17AM (#59561612)

    I wrote rules that say that my neighbors need to mow my yard. Any neighbor that does not comply will be held accountable. However, I am not a tyrant, so I wrote provisions into the rule the excuses the 85yr old widow next door from participating.

    I'm sorry. I tried really hard to continue with the sarcasm, but. . .

    NOOOO!! That is not how this works! That is not how ANY of this works!

    Hey! India! Up yours!

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      That's exactly how it works if you do business in India. If you sell your app there or run a web site that transacts with people you need to follow Indian law.

      If you don't want to do that just untick India in the list of app stores and places you accept payments from.

  • Many countries hold companies accountable for product liability. So if a consumer injured something to pursue otherwise do not let dangerous junk in a country. Typically need to setup at least a holding company and usually need a local registered officer to get things done. While possible to designate a local rep they will want indemnity and not intermediate with fly by night businesses. The software businesses now getting similar attention. Not sure how well India new rules compare to EU , US , Japan but
    • Many countries hold companies accountable for product liability.

      But how often is the product built by the customer? Governments, and the average person, are trying to fit this model into existing molds.
      • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
        Re "built by the customer?" ... like a charity, NGO but with donations?
        No gov can understand how to "legally" work with something as new and complex as a charity.
    • Many countries hold companies accountable for product liability. So if a consumer injured something to pursue otherwise do not let dangerous junk in a country. Typically need to setup at least a holding company and usually need a local registered officer to get things done. While possible to designate a local rep they will want indemnity and not intermediate with fly by night businesses. The software businesses now getting similar attention. Not sure how well India new rules compare to EU , US , Japan but those are fairly aligned to OECD type rules.

      The problem with applying the current product liability to online sites is determining exactly what they are responsible for when it is user supplied content. Should Uber be responsible for drivers? IMHO, yes, because they can control who drives, check backgrounds and remove bad drivers. Should Wikipedia be held liable because a user edits a webpage that results in offending some elected official? Product liability thus becomes a way to censor sites under threat of liability. At some point, companies need

    • Wikipedia is basically arguing that it deserves common carrier status [wikipedia.org]. That is, the "product" is not the information that Wikipedia is delivering. The product is the delivery itself. The information is created by others, and thus any liability should fall upon them, not to Wikipedia. Without this sort of common carrier status, it would be impossible for a private company to offer things like phone service. If some people used their phones to coordinate a murder, by India's law (if it extended to phone
      • by AHuxley ( 892839 )
        Depends on the nations idea of been a publisher and if they have the US idea of "common carrier status" for not an ISP...
        for publishers, charity workers, hosting and publishing content...
        Curating content.

        Still got that ISP feel as a publisher with US "common carrier status".... in another part of the world outside the USA... ?
        Should EU, German laws work in the USA?

        Then why should US ideas of "common carrier status" for a US ISP work in India over online content?
        Want US protections? Stay 100% i
  • been a publisher.
    What did people think it would be like the USA all over the world with US IPS like protections "online" for ever?
    Welccome to the "business" of publishing.
    Just like any set of "encyclopaedia" books would.
    To be legally sure of their content in the nations they published in.
    Like the US telco system, US software and OS workers had to respond to the needs of the NSA and US gov.
    In India a publisher has to be "responsible" for their content.

    India bad for having a legal system?
    US goo
  • People on the Internet are assholes because of anonymity. In real life, they wouldn't dare and risk being shunned or outright punched in the face.

    So if this forces Google to present to us, somebody ... *to punch him in the face* [youtu.be] ... Daily. For the utter catastrophe that is YouTube recommendations and the complete inability to give feedback and see what it results in, then that was already worth it.

    If it gives us the ability, to finally meet that Wikipedia admin who *deletes fucking everything* that isn't wr

In case of injury notify your superior immediately. He'll kiss it and make it better.

Working...