Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 JUNE 2021

Market Intelligence Thought Leadership Award Winner

Redefining Intermediary Safe Harbour: Free Speech And Privacy Concerns In India

Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal
Contributor
Phoenix Legal

Phoenix Legal

Phoenix Legal is a leading full-service Indian law firm, founded in 2008, providing comprehensive...

View firm profile
Explore more from Phoenix Legal

The Information Technology (Intermediaries Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021 ("New Rules") were notified by the Ministry of Electronics...

IndiaPrivacy
Nayantara Narayan
Nayantara Narayan
Author LinkedIn connections

The Information Technology (Intermediaries Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021 ("New Rules") were notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on 25 February 2021. The Part II of New Rules marks a paradigm shift in the treatment of safe harbour provided to intermediaries and significantly overhauls the obligations cast on them. This article analyses the Part II of New Rules and its impact on intermediaries, free speech and privacy.

Background

Safe harbour to intermediaries, i.e., exemption of liability against third-party content hosted by them, is laid down in Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ("IT Act"). In 2008 learning from the infamous baazee.com case1 where the CEO of an e-auction website was charged under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") and IT Act, the nature and scope of safe harbour to intermediaries was expanded. The amended Section 79 of the IT Act accorded safe

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Cross-Border Data Transfers Under India’s DPDP Act: Rules, Restrictions And Compliance Roadmap For 2027

India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) introduces a relatively permissive framework for the cross-border transfer of personal data from India. Unlike the European Union’s GDPR, which relies extensively on adequacy decisions and prescribed transfer safeguards, the DPDP framework adopts a negative-list approach: international transfers are generally permitted, subject to restrictions that may be notified by the Central Government.
IndiaPrivacy
King, Stubb & Kasiva
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Article

DPDP Data Breach Notification In India: Timelines, Requirements And Key Compliance Considerations

A personal data breach can create immediate legal, operational, and reputational consequences for an organisation. Under India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) and the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 (DPDP Rules), specific obligations have been prescribed for Data Fiduciaries following a personal data breach. While organisations may already have broader data protection and cybersecurity measures in place, breach notification requires a distinct and time-sensitive response. The DPDP framework requires communication both to affected Data Principals and to the Data Protection Board of India.
IndiaPrivacy
King, Stubb & Kasiva
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Article

Data Retention And Deletion Under The DPDP Act: How Long Can Businesses Retain Personal Data In India?

India’s data protection framework has moved from legislation to implementation. With the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (“DPDP Act”) and the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 (“DPDP Rules”) now notified, organizations processing personal data in India need to reassess how long they retain personal data, why they retain it, and how they ultimately delete or anonymize it.
IndiaPrivacy
King, Stubb & Kasiva
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Article

What Happens To Existing SPDI Rules After Full DPDP Enforcement?

India’s data protection landscape is undergoing its most significant shift in over a decade. The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011 (“SPDI Rules”), have long formed the core of personal data protection obligations under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act“) for body corporates handling sensitive personal data or information.
IndiaPrivacy
King, Stubb & Kasiva
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Article

From Consent To Accountability: Japan’s 2026 APPI Amendment Bill And The New Data Strategy For AI-Driven Businesses

AI regulation does not always arrive in the form of a dedicated AI statute. More often, it enters through privacy law. On April 7, 2026, the Japanese Cabinet approved a bill to amend Japan’s Act on the Protection of Personal Information (“APPI”). The Diet passed the amendment on July 10, 2026, and it was promulgated on July 17, 2026 as Act No. 56 of 2026; the amendment is now enacted but not yet in force, with its main provisions taking effect on a date to be fixed by Cabinet order no later than mid-2028.
IndiaPrivacy
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Article

Newsletter August Disputes

This newsletter examines recent Supreme Court judgments across arbitration, civil law, criminal law, insolvency, and white-collar crime. Key rulings address the binding of non-signatories to arbitration agreements, the scope of "industry" under the Industrial Disputes Act, limitations on FIR registration following Section 156(3) rejections, and the evidentiary requirements for proving bribery demands under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal
Article

Competition Monthly - September 2026 Edition

The Competition Commission of India has issued significant rulings on anti-competitive practices in agricultural input distribution and tire procurement, while also approving major acquisitions in sports franchising and education technology. These decisions demonstrate the CCI's active enforcement against bid-rigging and boycott campaigns, alongside its assessment of market consolidation in emerging sectors.
IndiaAntitrust/Competition Law
Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal
Article

Supreme Court's Five-Judge Verdict On Modification Of Arbitral Awards: A Welcome Evolution Or Judicial Overreach?

In a long-awaited verdict that revisits the doctrinal rigidity of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act), a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court in Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies Ltd. (2025 INSC 605) has pronounced that Indian courts do possess a limited power to modify arbitral awards.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal