Cyber Law
Cyber Law
1. Fraud:
Consumers depend on cyber laws to protect them from online
fraud. Laws are made to prevent identity theft, credit card theft,
and other financial crimes that happen online. A person who
commits identity theft may face confederate or state criminal
charges. They might also encounter a civil action brought by a
victim. Cyber lawyers work to both defend and prosecute
against allegations of fraud using the internet.
2. Copyright:
The internet has made copyright violations easier. In the early
days of online communication, copyright violations were too
easy. Both companies and individuals need lawyers to bring an
action to impose copyright protections. Copyright violation is an
area of cyber law that protects the rights of individuals and
companies to profit from their creative works.
3. Defamation:
Several personnel uses the internet to speak their mind. When
people use the internet to say things that are not true, it can cross
the line into defamation. Defamation laws are civil laws that
save individuals from fake public statements that can harm a
business or someone’s reputation. When people use the internet
to make statements that violate civil laws, that is called
Defamation law.
5. Freedom of Speech:
Freedom of speech is an important area of cyber law. Even
though cyber laws forbid certain behaviors online, freedom of
speech laws also allows people to speak their minds. Cyber
lawyers must advise their clients on the limits of free speech
including laws that prohibit obscenity. Cyber lawyers may also
defend their clients when there is a debate about whether their
actions consist of permissible free speech.
6. Trade Secrets:
Companies doing business online often depend on cyber laws to
protect their trade secrets. For example, Google and other online
search engines spend lots of time developing the algorithms that
produce search results. They also spend a great deal of time
developing other features like maps, intelligent assistance, and
flight search services to name a few. Cyber laws help these
companies to take legal action as necessary to protect their trade
secrets.
It has opened the doors for the entry of corporate companies for
issuing Digital Signatures Certificates in the business of being
Certifying Authorities.
Cyber laws exist to protect people from online fraud. They prevent
online crimes, including credit card and identity theft. A person who
commits such thefts stands to face criminal charges.
TYPES OF JURISDICTIONS
THEORIES OF JURISDICTION
This test is applicable where both or any of the parties are outside the
territorial jurisdiction of the court. In the landmark judgment in
Washington v International Shoe Company, this theory was evolved
by the US Supreme Court.
INTRODUCTION:
INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE:
INDIAN PERSPECTIVE:
India has the second largest Internet consumer base in the world, after
China. As the right to free speech includes the right to access and
gather information as well, the Indian Government has been working
on bridging the Digital Divide through its Digital India Initiative. In a
country with a growing reliance on the Internet, it becomes important
to understand the legal framework that governs speech online.
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION:
LEGISLATIVE RESTICTION:
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) places some restrictions on free speech.
It criminalizes speech that is seditious, obscene, defamatory,
promoting enmity between different groups on ground of religion,
race, place of birth, residence, language, committing acts prejudicial
to maintenance of harmony, or consisting of statements, rumors, or
reports that may cause fear, alarm, disturb public tranquility, or
promote enmity or ill will.
The offender is liable to be punished with a jail term ranging from
two to seven years, if found guilty. Further, the Official Secrets Act
also contains a provision that criminalizes wrongful communication
of information that may have an adverse effect on the sovereignty and
integrity of India. All these provisions are applicable to Internet users
as well.
CURRENT SCENARIO:
A total of 136, 13, 10 and 492 social media websites were blocked in
2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 (till 30.11.2015) respectively under
Section 69A of IT Act, 2000. Further, a total of 533, 432 and 352
social media websites were blocked in compliance with the directions
of the competent Courts of India in 2013, 2014 and 2015 (till
30.11.2015) respectively. Also, as per National Crime Records Bureau
(NCRB), a total of 4,192 cases were reported under section 66A of the
IT Act 2000 (under the offences of sending offensive messages
through communication services etc.) during 2014.
INTRODUCTION
The right to internet espouses two facets of the right to internet access
and the right to speak and express oneself over the internet, which are
the positive negative and forms respectively. There is a host of
conceptual and theoretical issues that underpin the right to internet.
The pertinent question that arises here is: what is the locus of the right
to internet within our legal system? Whether it is a right held only by
citizens only or by people universally? If it is taken in the former
sense, then it suggests the right is merely statutory and if understood
in the latter, a kind of human right. There is the question as to the
nature of the right: natural or fundamental.
There are broadly two ideas that make a case for the recognition of
the right to meaningful access which has received much attention
from scholars. The first being that the right to meaningful internet
access can be brought in place if the State chooses to frame
regulations with regard to market conditions and distribution of
resources with a view to enable equitable access. This view has roots
in Article 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution. The second advocates
that the right to internet be recognized by the State in the form of a
statutory, sui generis right to internet access from existing
international human rights obligations.
If I have the freedom to speak and express myself, then I must also
have the necessary means and avenues to echo the same. An
economic and social precondition, lurking in the backdrop, to the
exercise of the right under Article 19(1)(a) assumes significance here.
The role of the State in enabling this precondition has been the subject
of much debate in our country and more so in the United States under
their First Amendment jurisprudence.
Since the Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the right to freedom
of speech and expression over the medium of internet, we may peruse
its various decisions to see whether the right to internet access can be
recognized by the judiciary. The tectonic and conflicting shifts in the
jurisprudence of the Hon’ble Apex Court under Articles 19(1)(a) and
19(2) will help us understand this aspect.
Justice Mathew subscribes to the view that for the larger community
to have access to infrastructure to exercise the freedom of speech, it
becomes necessary that the government regulates such access and
market conditions to ensure that resources are not concentrated in a
few hands. Since the Newsprint Policy, in its anti-monopolistic
objectives aimed to put in place a wide range of ideas in the public
domain, Justice Mathew held it to be constitutionally valid.He offers
us a much more nuanced and substantive version inbuilt in Article
19(1)(a).
The State is required to take into account the differing economic and
social conditions of its citizens and how those differences hinder
equal access to the exercise of their basic rights. Justice Mathew
reminds us of the constitutional obligation of the State to enable every
individual achieve substantive equality. He invokes the Directive
Principles of State Policy, though unenforceable, to argue that under
Article 39(b)the Constitution furnishes for distribution of the material
resources of the community to subserve the common good.
These are some decisions of the Supreme Court that advocate the
socio-democratic theory of free speech. Unregulated marketplaces do
not offer any safeguards against a monopoly and concentration of
resources. The market is an instrument and not an end in itself which
is used to bring about a diversity of ideas and opinions in the public
domain through intervention of regulations. Thus, if the State in the
future chooses to regulate the market and take anti-monopolistic
measures to ensure greater access of the masses to the internet as
opposed to concentration in the hands of a few it may do so.
RIGHT TO INTERNET AND NON-STATE ACTORS
Another important aspect of the Right to Internet is the regulation of
speech and expression by non-State actors such as social media
platforms. Does a citizen when a non-State actor like Twitter infringe
his right under Article 19(1)(a) have the remedy to enforce it in a
court of law? The recent case of Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde
challenging Twitter’s decision to delete his account permanently
before the Delhi High Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution
takes us to this question. A perusal of case laws reveals that Indian
courts have not held any non-State actor as State just because they
perform a public function. The two tests used by the courts to hold a
private actor as State are:
Since, private social media platforms clearly fail the second test, it is
unlikely that a citizen could have his rights enforced against them. No
doubt, social media platforms perform an important public function
by providing a platform for individuals to exercise their free speech
right.
CASE LAWS:
1. In the case of Anuradha Basin V. Union of India, Supreme Court
held that the right to freedom of speech and expression under
Article 19(1) (a) and the right to freedom of trade and commerce
under Article 19(1) (g) through internet is constitutionally
protected but subjected to reasonable restrictions.
In the case of K.S. Puttaswamy V. Union of India, Supreme
Court of India held that any restrictions imposed by the state on
the right to freedom of speech and expression and right to
practice any profession or occupation over the medium internet
under Article 19 have to pass the proportionality test. The
proportionality test is used to measure the reasonability of the
government’s decision. Kerala High Court held that right to
have access to the internet is an integrated part of the
fundamental right to education and the right to privacy under
article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
CONCLUSION
Going by the more substantive vision that the socio-democratic theory
of free speech espouses, the right to internet needs to be recognized
expressly by the State. Concomitant to express recognition of the
right, there is a pressing need for the State to intervene and regulate
the market and lay down the policy with regard to meaningful access
to internet. The State largesse aimed at improving the conditions of
internet access further depends on whether the State chooses to roll
out a number of schemes and programmes such as Digital India and
the like in this regard, or whether it chooses to regulate the market of
data connectivity and by passing on the obligation to the non-state
actors (which might again be subject to an Article 19(1)(g) challenge).
INTRODUCTION
Human rights have always been a part of our human conscience. The
concept of human rights can be traced back to the natural law
philosophers, such as, Locke and Rosseau. The concept of human
rights protects individuals against the excesses of state. The concept
of human rights represents an attempt to protect the individual from
oppression and injustice. These human rights have been added into
the Indian Constitution in the form of ‘Fundamental Rights’.
WHAT IS “PRIVACY”?
The word “privacy” is a very simple yet very complicated word. This
word does have a specific definition because this is a very
multidimensional concept and cannot be explained. It has no legal
definition and deserves more enumeration than to be defined. This is a
very crucial term and has emerged recently.
Even though a debate and discussion did take place in the Constituent
Assembly regarding right to privacy. The formal proceeding of the
Constituent Assembly started with the drafting of the in December
1946 and the Constituent Assembly constituted various committees
whose main work was to provide reports to the Drafting committee,
which would in turn formulate a draft of the Constitution. It was at the
Committee Stage that a Sub-Committee group did try to advocate the
right to privacy to be a part of the Fundamental Rights.
From the very beginning, there were strong differences of opinion
related to the right to privacy, members like B.N Rau, A. K Ayyar and
M.K. Panikkar had a strong objection to right to privacy to be
upraised to the status of a Fundamental Right. In fact the most open
criticism of right to privacy was done by Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar
and B. N. Rau, who were the members of the Constituent Assembly,
the comments of both these members shows their resentment towards
the right to privacy.
Ayyar was of the opinion that granting the right to privacy and
secrecy in correspondence would be disastrous, it would elevate every
private/ civil communication to that of State papers. This would
adversely affect civil litigation where documents form an essential
part of the evidence and B.N. Rau was primarily concerned with the
interference of the right to privacy with investigative powers of the
police authorities. Later Both Rau and Ayyar were successful in
persuading the Advisory Committee to leave out provisions relating to
the right to privacy.
In one of the earliest cases, M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, where the
Supreme Court on the issue of ‘power of search and seizure’ held that
privacy cannot be brought under fundamental rights as it was
something not related to the Indian Constitution. It was seen that the
Supreme Court had a narrow interpretation in this case, limiting itself
only to the prescribed statutory regulation.
A decade later there was another important case, which was Kharak
Singh v. The State of U.P.[10] that dealt with the issue of surveillance
and that whether the surveillance which was defined under the
Regulation 236 of the U.P. Police Regulation led to the infringement
of fundamental rights or not and that did right to privacy come under
fundamental right or not. The verdict that was given by the Supreme
Court denied that the right to privacy was a fundamental right and that
it was not a guaranteed right under our Constitution and therefore the
attempt to ascertain the movement of an individual merely in a way in
which privacy is invaded is not an infringement of a fundamental
right guaranteed under Part III of the Indian Constitution. And it
however held that Article 21(right to life) was the repository of
residuary personal rights and recognized the common law right to
privacy. However in this case Justice Subba Rao did say that privacy
is a facet of Liberty.
The next case was Govind v. State of M.P.[ Even though this case was
alike the Kharak Singh case the approach towards this case was very
different. It upheld the validity of Madhya Pradesh Police Regulation
Act of 1961, under reasonable restriction. The judicial approach was
that there is an existence of right to privacy in terms of the different
guarantees provided by Part III of the Indian Constitution. However,
the Supreme Court also observed that in the absence of legislative
enactment, the right to privacy will necessarily have to go through a
‘case-by-case development’ because just one single case will be
inadequate to see the exceptions and consequences of right to privacy.
But one cannot deny the fact that this case did broaden the scope of
Article 21 so that the right to privacy could fall into it.
Then it was the Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India case where the
Supreme Court in a broader sense interpreted Article 21. The Supreme
Court stated that the term ‘natural law’ which included the right to
personal liberty and rights of personal security were incorporated in
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
R. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu was one of the first cases which
elaborated the development and the span of right to privacy in a
detailed manner. The apex court had held that the right to privacy was
implicit to the right to life and liberty which Article 21 guaranteed. It
further recognized that a citizen has a right to safeguard the privacy of
his own, his family, marriage, procreation, motherhood, child bearing
and education amongst other matters. None can publish anything
concerning the above matters without any consent and also that the
right to privacy can be both an actionable claim and also a
fundamental right.
The Act also recognized few forms of cyber crimes and provided for
punishments for the same. The cyber crimes made punishable under
the Act are set out from sections 65 to 85. The punishment prescribed
thereunder, ranges from imprisonment upto three years to
imprisonment to life and any fine amount could be imposed. An upper
ceiling limit ranging from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.5,00,000 is also
prescribed. The cyber crime is an evolving field and therefore with
changing times, more and more crimes that emerge from violations
committed in the cyber space is detected. The common forms of the
cyber crimes have been broadly categorized into cyber crimes against
person and cyber crimes against property.[18]
The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also dealt with the right to privacy in
the context of interception of phone calls in the case of Amar Singh v.
Union of India[19].
18. The right to privacy — by itself — has not been identified under
the Constitution. As a concept it may be too broad and moralistic to
define it judicially. Whether right to privacy can be claimed or has
been infringed in a given case would depend on the facts of the said
case. But the right to hold a telephone conversation in the privacy of
one’s home or office without interference can certainly be claimed as
“right to privacy”.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, it is clear that Right to privacy had no place in the
Indian Constitution in the beginning because it was considered to be a
natural right which a person gets by virtue of his birth but then there
were no remedies in case the same got infringed. With time evolution
of the right took place with precedents and judgements and now has a
unique place in the Constitution. It is also found that each individual
accessing the cyber space ought to be better informed about the
advantages and disadvantages of using the same. It is necessary to be
a responsible user of the cyber space and awareness is the key. The
law in respect to the right to privacy with respect to cyber space is
still in its nascent stage and therefore, the individuals have a key role
to ensure that their rights to privacy are not intruded due to ignorance.
INTRODUCTION
These days a term data protection has become synonymous with other
rights of the citizens which are guaranteed by the state. With the
beginning of the 21st century, there has been a sharp increase in the
development of technology, which subsequently has become an
integral part of human life. Today, these technologies have connected
to the day to day life of a human being in such a way that, these
technologies holds important data related to a user. That’s why data
protection has become so relevant in safeguarding the interest of an
individual.
1. Right to erasure– under GDPR, the data subjects have the right
to erase their data, having stored with any data controller or
processor.
2. Right to data portability– under GDPR, the data subjects have
the right to port their personal data concerning
himself/themselves to one data controller or processor to
another.
Passwords;
Financial information such as bank account or credit or debit
card or other payment instrument details;
Sexual orientation;
Medical records and history; and
Biometric information.
CONCLUSION
All the states have given favourable consideration to the model law
while enacting or revising their laws so that uniformity of the law
applicable to the alternatives to the paper-based methods of
communication is facilitated.
PUBLIC KEY
Public Key Cryptography is also known as asymmetric cryptography.
It is an encryption technique that uses a pair of keys (public and
private key) for secure data communication.
In the pair of keys, the public key is for encrypting the plain text to
convert it into ciphertext, and the private key is used for decrypting
the ciphertext to read the message.
The private key is given to the receiver while the public key is
provided to the public.
Therefore, we can say that encryption and decryption take more time
in public-key encryption.
Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA)
Diffie-Hellman
PRIVATE KEY:
The secret key encryption algorithm is also known as symmetric
encryption algorithm because the private key, the same key (or
secret key) is used by both the parties, i.e., the sender and receiver,
for Encryption/Decryption technique.
The sender uses the secret key and encryption algorithm for
encryption, whereas for decryption, the receiver uses this key and
decryption algorithm.
Block Ciphers
Stream Ciphers
Hash Functions
DEFINITIONS
*Vinisha note*
Anyone can encrypt a message using the public key, but only the
holder of the private key can unlock it. With no chance of the
communication being intercepted and read by a third party, anyone
can send a secure message to the public key’s owner.
DRAWBACKS:
Hash Function
ADVANTAGES:
Data integrity: Hash functions are useful for ensuring the
integrity of data, as any changes to the data will result in a
different hash value. This property makes hash functions a
valuable tool for detecting data tampering or corruption.
DISADVANTAGES:
Collision attacks: Hash functions are vulnerable to collision
attacks, where an attacker tries to find two different inputs that
produce the same hash value. This can compromise the security
of hash-based protocols, such as digital signatures or message
authentication codes.
The public key infrastructure uses a pair of keys: the public key and
the private key to achieve security. The public keys are prone to
attacks and thus an intact infrastructure is needed to maintain them.
The PKI is the medium that establishes the validity and legality of the
digital signatures used by the subscribers and of the bodies issuing the
digital signatures.
Subscriber
The deputy controllers and assistant controllers are under the control
of the controller and perform the functions as specified by him. The
term, qualifications, experience and conditions of service of the
Controller of certifying authorities will be determined by the Central
Government. It will also decide the place of the head office of the
Controller.
FUNCTIONS OF CCA (SECS. 18-25)
POWER OF CCA
OTHER ROLES
Can suspend the license if he isn’t pleased with the validity of the
applicant.
The CCA certifies the public keys of CAs the use of its own non-
public key, which permits customers in the our on-line world to
verify that a given certificate is issued by a licensed CA. For this
reason it operates, the Root Certifying Authority of India (RCAI).
The CCA additionally continues the Repository of Digital
Certificates, which incorporates all the certificates issued to the
CAs inside the country.
SUBSIDARY BODIES
Certifying authorities
Subscriber
DUTIES OF SUBSCRIBERS:
The duties of subscribers are covered under chapter VIII of the IT
Acts.
Electronic records
EGovernance
https://blog.ipleaders.in/admissibility-evidentiary-value-electronic-
records/
E - CONTRACTS
Section 2(h), of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, tells us that the term
‘contract’ is an agreement that is enforceable under the law.
KINDS OF E-CONTRACT
(iii) In Hubbertv. Dell Corp. The Illinois Court of Appeal held that the
a browse wrap agreement to which the consumers received repeated
exposure in the form of the words "All sales are subject to
Dell'sTerm[s] and Conditions of Sale in a series of pages which had to
be accessed to complete a purchase, and a conspicuous blue hyperlink
to the terms and conditions, was enforceable.
Not only is the notice in large font, and in bold, caps and italics, it
also specifically mentions a key provision of the agreement (the
mandatory arbitration agreement) so that the user cannot deny notice
later in time by saying, for example. that she did not read the
agreement in entirety.
3. Article 11 of the Model Law: S10A of the IT Act has been drafted
along the lines of Articles 11 of the Model Law formation and
validity of contracts. It provides that: on the
A. In the context of contract formation, unless otherwise agreed
by the parties, an offer and the acceptance of on offer may be
expressed by means of data messages. Where a data message
is used in the formation of a contract, that contract shall not
be denied validity or enforceability on the sole ground that a
data message was used for that purpose.
B. The provisions of this article do not apply to the following:
(]."
4. No Effect on Law of Contract Formation:
A. S10A provides for a new means of forming contracts, but does
not in any way affect the Indian Contract Act or any other rules
of contract formation.
B. The Indian Contract Act in itself does not specify the means by
which the communication in the various stages of contract
formation should be made, which means that communication
may be made through any means which has the effect of
communicating the proposal acceptance or revocation.
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/what-is-edi-electronic-data-
interchange/
E-COMMERCE
7. Models:
Business-to-consumer (B2C)
Business-to-business (B2B)
Business-to-government (B2G)
Consumer-to-consumer (C2C)
Consumer-to-business (C2B)
Consumer-to-government (C2G)
https://www.tutorialspoint.com/e_commerce/
e_commerce_business_models.htm
For everything below read Rashida notes
E-GOVERNANCE
WHAT IS E-GOVERNANCE
E-GOVERNANCE PROJECT IN INDIA
THE NATIONAL E-GOVERNANCE PLAN (Ne-GP)
E-COURTS MISSION MODE PROJECT OF INDIA
E-BANKING TRANSCATION
ONLINE PAYMENT OPTIONS
FIRST VIRTUAL
CYBER CASH
SECURED ELECTRONIC TRANSCATION
MEANING