Tsaaro got CERT-IN Empanelled | MeitY has published the DPDP Rules, 2023.
Tsaaro got CERT-IN Empanelled | MeitY has published the DPDP Rules, 2023.
Tsaaro got CERT-IN Empanelled | MeitY has published the DPDP Rules, 2023.
Tsaaro got CERT-IN Empanelled | MeitY has published the DPDP Rules, 2023.
Research Team (Tsaaro)
Published
The Government of India has revised the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, reducing the timeframe for social media intermediaries to remove unlawful content from 36 hours to three hours upon receiving a valid government notice. The amendment will come into force on February 20, 2026.
India, as a country with over one billion internet users, has increasingly relied on intermediary liability frameworks to regulate online speech, particularly in matters involving national security, public order, and statutory compliance. The revised rule reinforces the government’s emphasis on expedited content removal mechanisms and places heightened compliance obligations on major platforms operating in the country.
Compliance and Due Process Considerations
The contracted time frame, according to the legal experts, might offer difficulties in operations, especially in situations where the content is expected to be reviewed because of context, legally evaluated, or escalated internally. There have also been procedural safeguard concerns especially in heavy volume notice settings. According to platform transparency disclosures, thousands of takedown orders have been issued in recent years, with Meta alone reporting over 28,000 content restrictions in India during the first half of 2025 following government requests.
The amended rules also revisit the treatment of AI-generated content. Earlier proposals mandating visible labelling across a fixed percentage of screen space or duration have been replaced with a requirement that such content be “prominently labelled,” offering platforms greater flexibility in implementation.
Regulatory Context and Industry Response
The amendment reflects India’s evolving approach to digital platform regulation under the broader framework of the IT Rules, 2021. While the government has not publicly detailed the rationale behind the revised timeline, industry representatives have suggested that implementation clarity and structured consultation would be important to ensure practical compliance.
The development adds to ongoing discussions around intermediary liability, platform accountability, and content governance in one of the world’s largest digital markets, and may shape future debates on proportionality, transparency, and enforcement standards in India’s technology regulation landscape.
News of the week
1) Supreme Court refers to Constitution Bench on whether DPDP law uses privacy to dismantle people’s right to know
The Supreme Court agreed to refer to a Constitution Bench a batch of petitions challenging Section 44(3) of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, which amends Section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The petitioners argue that the amended provision places broad restrictions on the disclosure of “personal information” under RTI, potentially limiting access to information related to public officials and government functioning. They contend that the earlier RTI framework allowed authorities to balance privacy and transparency through a public interest test, whereas the new provision may reduce that scope. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, heading a three-judge Bench, declined to stay the operation of Section 44(3) but observed that the matter raises significant and complex constitutional questions, including the meaning of “personal information” and the balance between the right to privacy and the right to information under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. The Court has issued notice to the Union government, and the case will now be considered by a larger Bench.
2) More investors join legal challenge against South Korea over Coupang data leak handling
Three additional investment firms Abrams Capital, Durable Capital Partners, and Foxhaven have joined Greenoaks and Altimeter in initiating arbitration proceedings against the Government of South Korea over its handling of the data breach involving Coupang, alleging that authorities treated the U.S.-listed e-commerce giant in a discriminatory and disproportionate manner after the November disclosure that personal data of approximately 33 million customers had been compromised. The claimants contend that Seoul’s regulatory response, including intensified scrutiny and related enforcement actions, went beyond legitimate oversight and contributed to substantial shareholder losses, prompting the new investors to formally adopt the earlier notice of arbitration and to write to U.S. authorities seeking a review of South Korea’s conduct. Founded in 2010 by Bom Kim, Coupang has grown into one of South Korea’s largest digital commerce platforms, expanding beyond retail into food delivery, streaming, and fintech services, making it a significant player in both domestic and international markets. In response, South Korea’s Justice Ministry has stated that it will address the additional notices of intent to arbitrate in a systematic and professional manner, while the dispute has increasingly drawn attention in Washington, where lawmakers are examining broader concerns regarding the treatment of American companies operating abroad, thereby elevating what began as a cybersecurity incident into a matter with implications for international investment protection and trade relations.
3) US telecom firms face harsh senators' questions over phone records
Major U.S. telecom companies, including AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile, appeared before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee after it was revealed that phone “toll records” of eight senators had been obtained in 2023 as part of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election and the January 6 Capitol attack. Lawmakers questioned why the companies complied with subpoenas without additional review, with some senators expressing concern about safeguards for legislative privacy. The telecom firms stated that they acted in accordance with legal requirements and receive a large volume of law enforcement data requests each year. However, they acknowledged the need for stronger internal procedures and informed the committee that they are implementing revised policies, including enhanced protections for lawmakers’ official, personal, and campaign phone numbers, and greater scrutiny of sensitive requests. The hearing also reflected broader political divisions, as Democrats noted that several of the senators whose records were obtained had supported former President Donald Trump’s post-election actions. Although Trump was charged in connection with the January 6 events, the case did not proceed to trial and was later dropped following his re-election in 2024, consistent with Justice Department policy regarding sitting presidents.
For any queries, Connect with us.
Talk to a Privacy Expert
Get a free 1:1 session on AI compliance, DPDPA readiness, or incident response planning.
Related articles
