Let's Build a Responsible Cyber Society


Suggestion I: Spam Control:
.

 

India is embarking on a major review of the Information Technology Act which was passed with effect from October 17, 2000. Recent frauds of the Delhi MMS case and Gurgaon BPO Cases have increased the demand from the media for "Stricter IT Laws". In this scenario, Naavi.org is presenting a series of suggestions for the consideration of the MCIT while addressing the amendments and request comments from the public so that the Ministry will have the benefit of an opportunity to consider the public views in this regard.


Suggestion I: Spam Control:

 “Spamming” is related to “Marketing”, “Freedom of Speech” and “Privacy Rights”. It is necessary to therefore bring legislation on controlling “Spam” without affecting the genuine right to use the Internet media for marketing both for commercial, social and political purpose. Similarly, the legislation should not curb the freedom of speech while upholding privacy of individuals. 

The suggestion on “Spam Control” therefore includes modalities for managing genuine use of Internet as a communication medium through a “Bulk E-Mail Licensing Programme”.

 It is open for the Government to designate the CCA (Controller of Certifying Authorities” as the appropriate authority for the purpose of Spam Control.

 XY) Sending Unsolicited Electronic Messages:

 Except under a valid Bulk E-mail license from an appropriate authority

 Whoever,

  1) Sends or causes to send an unsolicited electronic message/s of any description with a source identity that is not disclosed, or

 2) sends or causes to send an unsolicited electronic message/s of any description after the addressee has duly notified him of his intention not to receive such communication as prescribed under this Act, or 

3) Except under an express consent of the recipient, sends or causes to send an electronic message/s of any description containing information that is obscene or offensive, that may defraud or is intended to defraud, that may cause or is intended to cause distress, that may break or is intended to break any law in force or that may otherwise create disharmony in or harm to the society or cause harm to the integrity of the nation and friendly relations with other countries,

 shall be punishable under this Act with any or all of the following

a) Payment of compensation or damage to each of the person/s affected by the offence subject to a maximum of Rs 1 lakh per person.

b) Imprisonment subject to a maximum of Two Years

c) Fine subject to a maximum of Rs 2 lakhs

Notwithstanding the punishment or penalties mentioned above, if the offence as defined under (XY) above results in or is intended to result in an act that is an offence under any other law in force, the offender shall also be liable for punishment or penalty to which the offender is liable under such laws.

Provided however that if any message is caused to be transmitted by mistake of fact or due to technological factors beyond the reasonable control of the person in whose name the message is sent, no offence would be recognized if such a person proves that the message was sent without his knowledge and he had exercised all due diligence to prevent commission of the offence.

Explanation:

For the purpose of the section (XY) above,

a.       the disclosure of source identity is considered sufficient if a reply can be sent to the disclosed source address and such reply does not bounce.

b.      an addressee may communicate his intention “not to receive” a communication through a digitally signed message or in any other manner that may be laid down for the purpose and unless specified, such notice shall expire after 3 months.

c.       the unsolicited message shall be admissible as evidence in a Court of law even if it is not digitally signed. (Ed: corresponding change required to be made in Indian Evidence Act)

d.      the intermediary who causes the unsolicited messages to be transmitted shall also be liable under the Act as if the offence was committed by them unless he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge and the intermediary had exercised all due diligence to prevent commission of the offence.

e.       a message is considered “solicited” if it may be inferred from the conduct and existing business or other relationship of the recipient that he consented to such messages being sent to him.

f.        “Express Consent” in sub clause (3) means only a consent obtained through a manually entered affirmative expression.

g.       “Appropriate Authority” for the purpose of this section shall be the “Controller of Certifying Authorities” or any other authority specifically designated for the purpose by an order of the Government of India.

 

(Comments welcome)

Naavi

July 5, 2005

 

Related Article/Information:



For Structured Online Courses in Cyber laws, Visit Cyber Law College.com

 

Back To Naavi.org