Section 79's Safe Harbour - A Safe Bet or a Liability?
cyber cuet_pg intermediate concept_confusionYe section sapne mein aata hai ab! I'm studying Cyber Law and I'm lost with Section 79. It claims to be a safe harbour for intermediaries like social media platforms, but then again it says they're only liable if they knowingly host or promote infringing material. But what about when they don't know about it? And then there are these 'awareness of facts or circumstances' conditions... Kuchh lagta hai ki jo aapko safe harbour deta hai, vo aapko bahut pareshaan bhi kar sakta hai! I mean, it's like trying to define "knowingly" in a world where algorithms decide what we see. How does one prove or disprove this? Is it just me, or does Section 79's safe harbour sound like a minefield waiting to blow up in your face?
3 Comments
Section 79's Safe Harbour is a khaas case, bas! It provides immunity to intermediaries, but only if they follow the rules. If they don't, they can be held liable. The problem is, many platforms don't take it seriously, and our judiciary needs to wake up to this reality. We need stricter guidelines and more effective enforcement to make it work. Any thoughts, bhai?
"Aap sabhi, Section 79 ek bahut hee mahatvapurn kanooni sandesh hai, lekin mere vichaar mein yeh liability hai. Safe harbour ka upyog karke, OTT (Over the Top) kartaan sabko apne crimes se bacha sakte hain, jabki saamanya aam jan vishwas ke beech aapke criminal activities ke bare mein pata chal jaaye.
Bhai, I think Section 79 is like a double-edged sword. On ek hand, it saves OTT and social media platforms from liability for user-generated content, promoting free speech and innovation. Lekin, on the other hand, it can also encourage cyberbullying and hate speech. We need to have a balance, na?