Law to regulate cyber goons?

http://www.cybervictims.org

One more strong amendment to the law meant for regulating cyber offences and this time I am little sceptical about it. The Tamil Nadu government has decided to incorporate the Goonda’s Act to curb cyber goons. Officially known as Tamil Nadu Prevention of  Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug offenders, Goondas, Immoral traffic offenders, Sand offenders, Slum grabbers, and Video pirates Act, 1985, the law is extremely powerful and its arms reach seven categories offenders: bootleggers, drug offenders, goondas, immoral traffic offenders, sand offenders, slum grabbers, and video pirates. Those who research in the area of social sciences including criminology, law and victimology, and those who practise criminal law, may note that in general, the typical offenders in such cases who are first nabbed by the investigating officers are often hired individuals or groups of individuals who work for organised crimes sector. The law definitely is extremely powerful to punish the big heads also. This law, if extended to include offences committed in the cyber space which reports suggest “has the propensity to disturb public order”,(see     http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/tamil-nadu/tn-will-use-goondas-act-to-curb-cyber-crime/article4218006.ece?homepage=true) would actually acknowledge the devastating damaging effect of cyber crimes. As I get from The Hindu, the law would be used to curb “ any repeated cyber crime that involves harassment, intimidation or cheating of innocent people in large scale”.  But the rest of the news report gave an idea that these definitions may be  largely meant for economic crimes and money laundering activities through identity related crimes in the internet. True; phishing, lottery scams, card scams, whatever you call them, people behind these crimes are becoming cyber goons who are no less than those which are already under the scope of the Goonda’s Act. In real life, the hired goondas may often be less educated and become habituated for need of money. Cyber goons who act as key players for phishing scams are well matured than these sects of people. But their ultimate motives remain the same: to earn money by illegal ways. In the Information Technology Act, 2000(amended in 2008), the offences chapter in Chapter XI already have bunch of provisions like sections 65 and 66, which prescribe punishment for unauthorised access to computer and data and modifying the contents and computer related offences, the controversial 66A which prohibits sending offensive messages etc, 66 C which prohibits identity theft and 66D which prohibits impersonation by cheating etc. All most all of them can be used in cases of phishing activities (off course depending upon the nature of the operation) and they prescribe jail terms which may extend to three years, besides monetary fines. To make the crime more severe, several Sections from the Indian penal Code like Sections 417, 419, 420 are also used in some cases. All of these sing in the same tune (with different tones): cheating and illegal monetary benefit.

Apart from these, is the Goonda’s Act needed ?

          I endorse Ratna Kapur’s one statement in her very recent article Rape and the crisis of Indian masculinity (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/rape-and-the-crisis-of-indian-masculinity/article4214267.ece). She says  More law — or calls for the death sentence — are not the answer to what is a deeply ingrained societal problem. True, one more law may not be the answer for ending the problem, but I feel happy to note that the problem which remained “cyber” for so long is gradually becoming “real”. The true scope of the law is yet to be determined. But I expect that it should not be misused by police personnel just for the sake of executing the law. We already have a devastating example of misuse of section 66A and the after effects must be taken as a lesson for all. However, I am still waiting to see whether the law extends its hand to nab cyber eve teasers too.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Law to regulate cyber goons”, 20^th December,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

To speak or not to speak while driving:A confused law ?

http://www.cybervictims.org

Survived Bangalore traffic last evening, I thought of revisiting certain feedbacks from the police regarding the side effects of certain laws. Talking and driving have been proved fatal many times  on  Indian roads. Gone are the days when vehicle owners could be punished for driving while listening to car radios only. Introduction of mobile phones, smart phones, blue tooth etc have ushered in a new era when the lawmakers had to think of prohibiting the driver from focussing his attention to other things like talking while driving.  True, talking while driving can be extremely fatal. Particularly when I see drivers of public vehicles like the buses, trucks or  even auto rickshaws, I feel extremely   uncomfortable. The typical position of placing the mobile phone on his ear and clipping it with a hiked shoulder proposes every possibility of faulty driving and even losing mobile phone from the ‘grip’ if the driver has to cross bumpy roads with equal speed as an F1 driver. Each time I am in the hands of such drivers, I keep on shutting my eyes off and on to avoid viewing any nasty accident (fortunately my fear has still now remained a fear only). But can the law really check this habit of talking while driving?

The recent Motor Vehicle Amendment Bill imposes a hefty punishment for repeated use for cell phones, hand held or hand free device or any gadget which actually aides in communicating while driving. Cell phones, i pods, GPs devices .....all are included in the red book now. The feedback from the police in this regard was particularly noteworthy.  They stated that it would be difficult to prove driver’s guilt under this law. Cudos to the police understanding. How can an officer on duty catch a driver who may be armed with a blue tooth on his ear and asking the passenger for the direction? Why would GPS system be at all installed in the cars? Above all, it needs to be understood that in many cities, and even semi rural places (which are blessed with good transport systems), auto rickshaw drivers are often seen to build up personal network among the residents by exchanging their mobile numbers. Their services are available almost 24/7 and this is possible because drivers receive calls while ‘on job’ and if they are driving other passengers, they instantly contact other fellow drivers to provide service to the ‘customers’. Say it a boon of digital telecommunication era, but this is the hard truth. These drivers may not be financially strong enough to buy hand free sets like the upper middle class or upper class car owners. But their business network remains alive for whatever device they have. Majority of urban and rural population of India is still not properly introduced to GPS system;  “call a cab” is still a spreading concept for many non metro cities and in this situation, the easiest way to call for a transport is relying on the mobile phone number given by the good old auto driver.

Added to this, the law even though can prove extremely good to regulate for  safe driving, poses another question: the driver should not concentrate on communication through electronic devices; what if the passenger does the same? Human beings cannot keep their attention focussed on one thing for long if he/she is surrounded by various communicating elements.  Indulging in communication with the passenger or through the communication device of the passenger which is held by the passenger can also be equally dangerous. Many often wise passengers advise others to keep on communicating with the driver while on a long drive. This is a common method adopted by many to keep the driver awake and to avoid any fatal accident which may be caused due to silent, boring and even strenuous drive hours. The driver’s guilt again becomes a question of burden of proof. As the law suggests, the driver needs to stop driving while attending his phone calls. But what would be the situation when the passengers are equally “disturbing” ? It needs to be remembered that while physical safety like wearing seat belts, using helmets etc are extremely necessary for a safe driving and the law must be punitive if the driver faults in these aspects,  at the same time, checking on the driver’s communication activities during driving needs a very high legal and psychological understanding.

But I cannot stop praising the police officials who pointed out this folly. Keep it up officers. If this is the attitude, misuse of law can be prevented in a far better fashion.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012),” To speak or not to speak while driving:A confused law?”, 13^th December,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

Showing death to the world

http://www.cybervictims.org

Off late there are too many disturbing reports about suicides in India. Well, if a researcher checks the graph, it can be seen that suicide rate probably goes higher immediately after the school leaving exams are finished or the exam results are out. Our young generation is stressed and many of them cannot take the pressure of being humiliated by peers and rejected by colleges they dreamt for. Yet another type of people who take this extreme step that attract my attention is those who commit suicide with web-cams on. Now this is really disturbing. The latest of this ‘brigade’ is a Chennai boy who took his own life with his web cam on. Before him, there were several others who did this and found their names in the news reports. While this boy in question finished his life for poor studies, others include those who committed suicide due to fight with girl friends, due to work pressure etc.  In the first case, I feel that the deceased probably had taken this extreme step to actually threaten the girlfriend on the other side of the screen. My claim can become a ‘truth’ only when the person witnessing it is properly investigated and the online communication is thoroughly investigated. The second case and cases like this boy in question may need more in-depth research, as whether they were persuaded by someone online at the time of death etc. But thinking from the other side, it is disturbing for the viewer to see a real suicide taking place infront of his/her eyes (through his camera). Ironically in India attempt to suicide is considered a penal offence and once the death has happened, the witnesses may face stringent police prosecution on several legal questions including persuading to even negligence in stopping the act. This is the case for many other countries too. But imagine a witness’s plight if he/she is a minor, or he/she never expected to witness such ghastly acts till he actually saw it. The prolonged process of investigating the evidences through checking the communications conveyed between the deceased or the one who tried to commit suicide and the witness on the other side should also obviously include cyber  forensic test  to ensure whether there were any third party activity involved in it or not. All these may leave the ‘witness’ even more traumatised.

Probably this is one of the worst examples of misuse of webcams by users. In one way, people must understand that attempting or committing suicide and showing death to the world is no big act of heroism. It creates bad example for others. On the other hand, it must also be understood that now time has come to take up interdisciplinary research to highlight this problem which may actually create new brands of cyber offences and cyber criminals.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Showing death to the world

”, 14^th October,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”

A message to my fellow netizens of internet era

http://www.cybervictims.org

It is disturbing to see how India is getting divided due to the pranksters and mischief mongers who took full (mis)use of social networking sites and digital communication medium, especially SMSs. Too many news reports, blogs, media high lights and I am distraught to see how the fear wave touched my own dreamy university town Tirunelveli. Yes, the fear has spread like a fire and people belonging to north east, who used to work in various industries including hotels, brick kilns, ports, every one is running back to their home land (See http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/article3794140.ece) . All for a dreadful SMS which instigated the violence in Bangalore and then it did not take much long to push out others from other southern cities of South India. I know this will die down. It will either have a natural death, or the phenomena would be killed in the rightful way by the authorities. But the fact remains fact. We are never encouraged to be  INDIANS  first. I married a Tamil and got settled in Tamil Nadu for past thirteen years. I speak the language of the place which has given me motherly comfort and which actually blessed me to become what I am today. But I am still tagged as a “north Indian” (I am not from northern part, I am from the eastern part of India), some of the oldies in my in laws are scared of me because of my non Tamil lineage ( a peculiar sociological behaviour which actually bars people from different regions from accepting others due to some age old cultural beliefs), some blame me for bringing in the Calcutta culture in my own home consisting me, my husband and my multi lingual and multi cultural child. In my virtual life, I often  get to see ‘groups’ of  Bengalis, Tamils, Hindus, Muslims, Christians, ................... the list is endless. Yes, all of us are practising our precious rights to speech, expression, religion, and life. But where is the red line? Who bars us? The answer is known to none. We are now a generation of internet era. Probably we are the first generation. How would our children who are born of multi-linguistic, multi religious, multi- cultural parents tag themselves? What about those who have migrated to other parts of the country for good? They are neither south Indian nor north Indian, neither Tamils, nor Kannadas, nor Bengalis, nor Assameese. They are INDIANS  of the internet era. But still then, the division stays; some over smart opportunists try to create the separatist movement through the digital technology and we are unnecessarily feeding them to grow like poisonous trees by taking them extremely seriously. Isn’t it an irony? When scholars, researchers, cyber psychologists bravely announce that every human being in the NET must learn how to detach oneself from the NET,  the NET is gripping us more by sheer technological ‘magic’ to forget about the human side of the users? 

          In spite of the fact that I had my ups and downs in this place due to cultural differences, I would still say people of Tamil Nadu have hearts  that are tied with the heart of India.  From my part, I am not giving any opportunist any opportunity to break my country and my family. What about you?

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), A message to my fellow netizens of internet era”, 19th August,2012, published in http://debaraticyberspace.blogspot.com" 

Tackle the bullied in you: an example set by a nine year old

http://www.cybervictims.org

  As a young student I was also subjected to bullying by my schoolmates. Unfortunately twenty –twenty five years back in India the word “bullying” was pretty unfamiliar with the students, parents, teachers and also behavioural scientists. When I joined this school in Kolkata in the late parts of 1980’s as an 8^th standard student, at first, my new classmates could not happily accommodate me in their groups. They took time. In between I regularly got to hear teasing and humiliating words targeting my body structure, my previous location and even my family back ground. Teachers were of no help either as they were busy bringing out the best of the lot for the forthcoming public exams. My only comfort cushions were my parents and my sister. We felt that these were extremely humiliating and teasing words; but never knew that this particular behavior is known as bullying and it is that particular girl/s who loved hurling those remarks, who needed more attention from the teachers and counsellors than me, because she/they probably had terrible personality disorders.  My mother probably understood this and she constantly petted me, comforted me telling me that I need to be strong enough to deal with such people not only in the school, but in future also. I grew up being a person strongly advocating positive thinking. I finally understood what my former classmates were actually going through when I got this golden opportunity to work in the project on cyber bullying. Huge amount of literature made me aware of various patterns of school bullying; added with this, my mentor Jayne Hitchcock, President, Working to Halt Online Abuse (WHOA), gifted me a unique training on how to withstand cyber bullying. No wonder, physical bullying and cyber bullying are different in nature and the effects of both may not be the same. But the core effect of bullying, either in case of physical bullying, or in case of cyber bullying remains the same; it hurts, it destroys the self confidence of the victim and it successfully wastes huge lot of study and activity times for the young victims.

            No sooner, I saw a growing little princess in my own home, my daughter, who I felt would be more vulnerable to bullying as she comes from a mixed cultural background and has a very uncommon name for the school. Some of her early behavioural symptoms regarding her day to day interactions with her classmates made me aware that bullying is back in this generation with the same old flavour. I started experimenting with her the tricks that my mother taught me and that were further nurtured by Jayne. I made her understand that whatever some people say her, she will always remain my darling princess, I will encourage her for better performances on each of her failures and I would love to see her as whatever she aims to be. Well, a pinch of sour; I warned her that I will not be her well-wisher if she crosses her lines for bad and   she has to learn from her own mistakes then, which might be extremely painful. Over the times, she accepted me as her best friend. She shares her own thoughts with me and she teaches me as how to laugh away worries and win over the situation.

And then came the biggest surprise for me as a mom . she came back from the school last week and showed me her note ; someone has left a message for her in her note  telling “You’re Loose”... the particular ‘adjective’ is a very common one in this place to describe one as a fool, idiot and stupid. No sooner I understood that some one has become a bully and found a (wrong) target in my daughter. I looked at my daughter and asked “are you hurt?” she twisted her lips in an attempt to smile and answered “well, not really. But I want to know who is this ‘friend’?”. I told her ‘what is the use in finding that out? Better ignore and enjoy life.’ She answered “I want to show him/her something”. I was literally taken aback when she returned from her desk after a few minutes; she had written this message as you can see above in the picture to the bully. she wrote " yes, loose persons win"  and she carefully closed the message by adding her own 'signature' "from Rai".

She started giggling heavily.......... the sweetest thing every parent would love to hear from his/her child; she told me she can see a baby with a back pack, a ripe fat tomato, a drum stick and  two unequal shaped potatoes... her favourite vegetables. I felt a peculiar joy.. She successfully tackled the ‘bullied’ in her. She refused to let herself be bogged down by the message. She gave me the greatest message “the writer would feel good if I feel bad....... I am feeling happy to get so many amusing things in the note.... thank you who ever you are”.

Didn’t she just reveal a CORE feeling? Don’t let yourself feel bullied. The more you FEEL the more you are HURT.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Tackle the bullied in you: an example set by a nine year old”, 12th  August,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

Cut-copy –paste....who cares?

http://www.cybervictims.org

Recently I met some young fresh college students who were preparing for their assignments. When they showed me the topics, I could not hold back my surprise and also appreciation. The topic was about new findings on astro-physics and they had to contribute from their own understandings. When I asked them what do they think about it, almost all of them answered that ‘internet will think for us’. Apparently they were planning to spend some days in the net- searching and then put the results of the same in the assignments. But the question is how far these contributions would be original? A faculty in a local college told me ‘no wonder, none of them write from their own’. It is no surprise to me too. Last year, I got to see one of my own write-ups on cyber crime against women, neatly cut and pasted in a scholarly article which came for submission to a noted journal. The editor somehow sensed something wrong and alerted me.

But I am not alone in this “stolen and victimised” group. There are many noted as well as upcoming scholars whose works are being used without proper citation or acknowledgements by others. Either such people do not know about copy right violations, or they care a hang about these. But what no one understands is, more than violation of certain legal terms, it victimises the original creator.  A simple blog full of genuine creativeness may take minimum two days time to materialise; whereas a full length scholarly paper may take minimum three months to maximum five months time to be written to the expectations of a standard journal. Indeed, the cost of  heavy weight books may not be afforded by many, and these open access informative write ups not only help people (especially students) to fill up the vacuum, but also they help them to finish off their works in record times. Just “search” and you would get the answers even at the odd hours of midnight. But it no way means that one can use these sources as mugging up knowledge to pour over in the assignments or projects. It is unfortunate that in India among the high school and undergraduate students, awareness regarding copy right violation in relation to such ‘references’ is hopelessly low. A striking reason for this could be that the law meant for copyright protection in India, has given much weightage  to literary, dramatic, musical works, architecture, computer programmes, films, photographs etc.  Scholarly works, which include short write-ups also, fall much in the kitty of the publisher/s  who choose to publish them. Authors of such works therefore in many cases become secondary copyright holder, or may not have the copyright at all, but confers the right to their publisher/s.   However, the same may not be the case when the write up is published in the world wide net. While independent bloggers using Google services, or independent writers using other web-pages hosted in the US, are hugely protected by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act or DMCA irrespective of their nationality, in India, the law is little tricky in this regard.   Section 3 of the Copyright Act, 1957 makes it clear that ‘publication’ means “making a work available to the public by issue of copies or communicating the work to the public”. This very definition apparently gives an indication that once a write-up is “floated” for public viewing, it is published. But the very next section, i.e, section 4 warns people that when such ‘publication’ is made without the author’s proper ‘license of the owner of the copyright’, it would be considered not published in the eyes of law. The conjugated inner meaning of these two sections lies in the fact that even if the work is ‘published’, no individual is allowed to use the same as his/her own work unless the original owner properly authorises the other person to use it. In practise, this authorisation can be implied when one uses a write-up from an open access source after properly citing the author’s name, the title of the write-up, the place where it is published and the date when it was published. However, when the write-up is published with the note from the author that it can be reused only with the written permission from the author, the way of obtaining permission extends by personally approaching the author for his/her permission.

In India hardly any undergraduate student is actually aware or is told about this. I observed that this awareness of respecting other’s hard work slowly arises in some students by regular reading of other available reading materials; some learn this when their works are rejected by editors on the ground of plagiarism. But unfortunately the number of these awakened individuals is very less. Largely, the education system is liable for this. In our schools we ask the students to produce exactly what is written in the text books; hardly any parent or teacher can spend time to make their wards understand what those scriptures actually mean. Many parents are never happy when they learn that their children are not taking up professional courses but prefer to be “thinkers”, or ‘researchers’; even when some land up in their dream courses, they are pressurised to produce some contributions towards the subject without being told how to do it on their own without ‘stealing’ other’s ideas. This gives rise to the vicious circle of infringement of copyrights and victimising the original authors.

Solution? Unless the ‘predecessors’/teachers/guides/parents show the way to be ‘innovative’, cut-copy-paste culture would happily exist in the land of unique thinkers and writers. Young students .......don’t victimise authors; respect their work, learn from them and show the world who inspired your work.

 Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Cut-copy –paste....who cares?

”, 29^th July,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”

 

Misuse of information technology, digital devices and rise of cyber crimes

http://www.cybervictims.org

In India consumption of information technology and electronic mediums for the same has seen steep high since the new millennium. I remember a Tamil movie in the late 1990s which showed how the computers would be used in future; it showed people are literally throwing off their desk tops  to the dustbins since they were “over used”,  people belonging to average income group have the power to buy laptops and grass root level workers are using mobile phones. Nonetheless, I am talking about an era when a desk top computer would have costed not less than twenty thousand rupees ( nearly $400) and an ordinary mobile phone with no device other than device for speaking and hearing would have costed not less than two thousand rupees (nearly $40). Cost of internet and pre paid sim cards for mobile phones were not generally accessible by people belonging to lower to middle income group.  As such, computers and mobile phones were considered to be prized possessions for the creamy layers. India was slowly getting introduced to cyber crimes like hacking. Crimes like child pornography, phishing etc were still considered as “not our problem still now”. Things have changed since then.

            Back in 2012, couple of days ago I was sitting at the railway station waiting for my train which will connect us to the international flight to Sweden. I was online through my husband’s IPad,  searching for some last moment details about the conference we were about to attend in couple of hours. Suddenly a woman shouted at me telling “ you will not spare the computer even at the railway station? be careful.. somebody might steal it.” Stunned, I looked  at her:  the woman must be in her late twenties, in a dirty sari, neatly pinned up here and there. She was a schizophrenic; must have been abandoned by her family and she remembers clearly how the computer screen looks like when one is online.  She sat on the floor near me and from her distracted communication with her imaginary child, I could clearly understand that she was  persuading the child to not to sit with “mobile phones”.  Within an hour or so, I saw another man, a daily wage earner who commutes from nearby place, speaking loudly over his prize possession, a cell phone with camera. I remember another incidence: on my way to Kolkata couple of years back, I got a few co passengers who were contract labourers from north Indian states. A couple of stations later, a young woman boarded the same compartment. She was accompanied by a man who could be her colleague, or even her boyfriend. Both of them looked well educated and professionals. One of the earlier co passengers made good use of his mobile phone; he started clicking the camera device randomly. When the woman noticed it, she instantly demanded not to click her and the owner of the device politely told her that he is getting accustomed to the device and doesn’t know how to handle it......lame excuse indeed. The lady’s companion snatched the phone and found a few pictures of the woman in different poses. He patiently deleted all of them and warned the owner that if he again does it, he will take stern action. The woman was probably spared because the owner of the device got down in the next halt without making any more attempt to ruin the peace.

What did I learn from all these incidences? Digital technology if put in wrong hands, can be devastating.  We can divide the cyber miscreants in two different sects: one who do it for fun; one who don’t do it for fun. There are numerous examples  of sexting cases, phone bullying cases involving children where you can see the  first sect of miscreants.  In many such  US court cases, defence had established ignorance of the accused. But what about miscreants who are not minors and who intentionally mishandle it for the purpose of experimenting the devices? Basically we can do nothing. There is no law in any country which prohibits ignorant persons from possessing a digital device with information and communication technology, be it a computer, or a mobile phone.  But off course, experience can turn an ignorant into a mighty individual. I sadly note that when laymen such as the above gather experience in handling the devices, the results may not be good. My assumption may not testify all, but surely would testify some.   The devices have inbuilt mechanism and the internet always opens it doors with both good and bad shades, which allures new users to experiment. This can lead to devastating effect including hacking and sexual offences of cyber space. What these people lack actually is the knowledge of cyber etiquette. Remember the old tradition of  attaching license for possessing radio? Perhaps it is time now for the companies making computers and electronic gadgets like the cell phones to think of attaching a module of user manual including etiquettes  with their products. May be this could bring down purposeful mishandling of the devices which gives rise to various sorts of cyber crimes.

Or you need to believe..... no gain no pain...

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Misuse of information technology, digital devices and rise of cyber crimes”, 21^st June,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”

Stop people: spare the disputed Mamata Banerjee cartoon

http://www.cybervictims.org

The cartoon controversy of  West Bengal Chief minister  has  created a new focus point for cyber law researchers like me. Why wouldn’t an individual express his political ideologies through cartoons? Why would the government gag this right?  Most supporters of liberal free speech guarantee protested the  Chief  Minister’s angry protests when a professor of a reputed university had reportedly spread the cartoon through someone else’s email id. When the lady noted the issue and the man behind this was indicted by the police, he apologetically accepted his first mistake, sending message from someone else’s email id. But he failed to understand the mistake which created such a big controversy, i.e spreading a supposedly offensive cartoon about Mamata Banerjee’s administrative skill and  human resource managerial skill. The cartoon was made after the then minister Trivedi was dropped by Banerjee because of some internal tip offs between the two. It apparently depicts parts of a  conversation between the two characters of a famous detective series film made by the legendary film maker Satyajit Ray for children. The cartoon picture which was widely circulated in the Facebook, showed Mamata’s face cut and pasted along with other two ministers, where one of the individuals tells “ei sei dustu lok”, meaning this is the bad man, and mamata says “dustu lok vanish”, meaning bad man vanish. She apparently speaks similar words like the villain in the noted children’s film where the person pushes another one to death and clarifies to the child protagonist that he has made him ‘vanished’(see Professor arrested for poking fun at Mamata. HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times

Kolkata, April 13, 2012. http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/WestBengal/Professor-arrested-for-poking-fun-at-Mamata/Article1-839847.aspx) .

What irked mamata were using her picture for conveying this ‘bad’ image, and also using the speech which according to her, conveyed the same meaning to the audience as the film characters did.... murdering the man in question  and removing him  from her path. According to the reports that posted her feelings for the issue, she had felt it was a cyber crime because it involved morphing of the pictures and it was insulting and injurious to her as well as her political party’s image(See Cartoon row: Mamata loses cool, storms out of live TV session, May 18, 2012. published in http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/cartoon-row-mamata-loses-cool-storms-out-of-live-tv-session-212905). Both of these crimes are recognised by the Indian Information Technology Act; the first under section 66 of the Act, which states that “If any person, dishonestly, or fraudulently, does any act referred to in section 43, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two three years or with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees or with both,”( To be more detailed about this, section 43 also includes unauthorised access to computer documents and altering the document for misuse of the same, among some other types of typical computer related crimes); the second under section 66A which prescribes punishment for sending grossly offensive messages or which have menacing character, or which is false, injurious, insulting etc. Well, that is her defence, and when she expressed her defence, a battery of intellectuals and common people burst out in protest saying this is nothing but gagging the freedom of speech and expression which is, according to me, is the most coveted right enshrined in the Indian constitution. Well, that is the people’s defence. People of India have not forgotten the emergency period that was created by erstwhile prime minister Indira Gandhi in the 1970’s,  when extremely strict regulations were brought in regarding journalism and also regular right to speech. This time, the protest was stronger because Mamata herself  belongs to that generation which grew up learning what should not be done with this almost sacred right.

But still then, I stand on the opposite platform. I feel there should be a limit line in activities which keep the soul of democracy alive, namely criticising the ruling party’s decision. However, there is one ‘myth’ that anti cartoon row people believed and  I would like to break. My defence line may look very thin,  but I stand strong on that.The incidence may not have involved “morphing” of the pictures of the individuals in the true meaning of morphing. The pictures were used as it is, however, they were accompanied by set of conversations which were framed and with visual indication lines  as to from whom they are originating. Well, ask me what is morphing and how affected people feel for it, for in my capacity as a cyber victim counseller, I get to see hundreds of such pictures of women especially, and I know their pain.  

But  my defence stands on the main  ground:  usage of  the logo of a government department,i.e the Indian railways for the purpose of such cartoons, which may derogate the actual purpose of  putting up the logo in the original government website. It must be understood that the cartoons were not meant to derogate a government establishment, but criticising people in it. Unauthorised usage of government emblems for trade, business, calling and professional practices is prohibited under section 3 of The Emblems And Names (Prevention Of Improper Use) Act, 1950. If the wordings of this section are pulled broadly, probably this very cartoon row would establish another milestone in Indian legal research field; for not to forget a small observation by a wise parliamentarian Sharifuddin  Shariq, who pointed out that cartoonists are given this chance to paint the politicians “wrong”(see “We ourselves have given the chance to cartoonists”, published in The Hindu on May, 14,2012, http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3419130.ece), which turns my attention to another question...can cartoonists fall under this law ?

People, it is wise to be a part of the largest democracy wisely. But do remember, you cannot wrongly ride over the law of the land to insult the core values of democracy.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Stop people: spare the disputed Mamata Banerjee cartoon”, 19^hMay,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”

CYBER VICTIMIZATION: The lawyer says: what are the Indian laws to prevent cyber stalking?

CYBER VICTIMIZATION: The lawyer says: what are the Indian laws to prevent cyber stalking?

http://www.cybervictims.org

When women pose as men in the virtual world

http://www.cybervictims.org

Couple of years back when Laurie Drew posed as a man to befool teenager Megan, who would subsequently commit suicide, women posing as men to date with women was a very underreported and unfocussed issue. When I picked up this very  issue of women posing as men to harass women earlier in my book “Cyber crime and the Victimization of Women: Laws, Rights, and Regulations”. Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. ISBN: 978-1-60960-830-9 , I noticed that one of the main causes behind such behaviour for women was a burning desire to take revenge on her victim.... jealousy.....thy green eyes.... The perpetrator woman generally feels extremely satisfied when she realises that she is driving the victim woman for nothing else but utter emotional disaster. Drew posed as a boy to give Megan a feeling how unworthy she is in the eyes of a boy.....a would be man, who would subsequently approve the worthiness of a woman. Most feminist scholars have argued since long against this very apparently (un)disputed truth. But this remains a fact for a majority of women and men alike. The reason behind such a nasty game by Drew was nothing but the anger, frustration and jealousy which arose due to her own daughter’s not so friendly and comfortable relationship with Megan. 

But note that I have used “one of the main cause” to describe my reasoning behind the issue. Apart from jealousy, there is something else which also drives women to play this nasty game. Imagine when a woman poses as a man just to have fun at the cost of the emotional distress of another woman! Don’t think that such behaviours are abnormal for women; but in reality, such trend is growing.  I do get to see couple of reported cases where women, mostly younger women play this fun game. Putting on the shoes of the opposite sex and playing with other women as charming prince in dating sites and also social networking sites is no more uncommon now. I refuse to believe that this could be the result of “penis envy” only, a Freudian psychoanalysis term.  Probably this might call for deep research on cyber psychology; but something in me tells that this could also be the result of acute loneliness in the wrongdoer as well as the victim. The ‘man’ woman unknowingly falls in the self created trap when the victim woman senses something wrong with the camouflaged identity. Not to forget the trail of private investigations, police complaints and even the risk of being banned by the website itself..... the perpetrator ‘man’ woman may become a victim herself as she may invite open threats regarding her sexuality, sexual orientation and following gradual out casting by the virtual society on which she would have depended heavily to change her monotonous life.

It is high time ‘man’-woman that you go ahead with some other positive productive leisure activity, for the painful crash of your imaginary ‘flight’ to the reality-ground  may become extremely hard to cope with.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “When women pose as men in the virtual world”, 18^th March, 2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”

Did the court do justice to Orkut posts that reportedly called Adnan to see his end?

http://www.cybervictims.org

In the time when web censorship is getting lime light due to the recent on going tussle between the courts and the Google and other websites, the news of acquittal of four  murder accused of Adnan Patrawala pulls out  mixed response from me. In 2007, this teenager was found dead some where in Navi Mumbai. He was the son of an affluent businessman; he loved life and social networking through Orkut. He reportedly became friendly with  his alleged murderers  through Orkut (see Did Orkut friends kidnap and kill Adnan?(August 20, 2007), published in http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/aug/20adnan1.htm) and was allured by one “Angel” to go out where he  met his bloody end (See Adnan murder trial opens on Orkut;Published on  Friday, Aug 24, 2007, By Arun Ram; availbale @ http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_adnan-murder-trial-opens-on-orkut_1117311). No body knows whether he really met “angel” of Orkut or not, but the police depended heavily on the indirect evidences including the Orkut exchanges which vouched that he went out to meet some one. His family later received two calls asking for a lump sum for Adnan, who was reportedly in their custody when the calls were made. The news was leaked in the media and it created a huge wave of sympathy among Adnan’s friends who started discussing the issue in many communities. Some believe that the alleged kidnappers got panicked with the out break of the news. The media highlighted how Adnaan’s friends in Orkut have started a virtual investigation.  Resultant the wrong doers killed the teenager.  In 2012, when the alleged murderers were  acquitted, the court justified its sentencing by stating that both forensic and circumstantial evidences were “assembled so loosely that it ended up cutting down each other rather than forming a cohesive thread against the accused” (Court acquits murder accused in Mumbai teenager Adnan case, pg 20,  The Hindu on January 31, 2012). The Orkut messages between the four accused men and Adnan were considered as the “key evidences” by the police; further the police reportedly drew the conclusion that Adnan was murdered by these guys on the notion that he was last seen with one of them. The police picked up the accused on the testimony of a garment dealer who saw one of the accused lifting apparently unconscious Adnan; later on the day, when he read about the whole issue, he informed the police. The defence lawyer emphasised that “there were no eye witnesses and an identification parade did not inspire the court’s confidence”.

The question of acceptability of the exchange of messages through Orkut really presents thin chances to target the four men. This is especially so since the identity of  “Angel” remained a mystery and no one could prove that the profile was operated by any of the accused or either their aide. The case presents a tangled web in every sense. Many suspected that all the profiles may have been fake and they were made to trap the poor little rich boy. But nonetheless, the boy did fall in the trap and the whole issue, as reported in the media, created an example as how virtual friends can allure one to come out of the net and face real life danger. But the court gave more weight on the production of solid evidences rather than depending on evidences such as these. True, the court stuck to the principles of rule of law, where flimsy evidences do not find any space. Perhaps the court did the right thing on not depending too much on the Orkut messages especially when the police themselves did not go for a stringent thorough   search. The news reports suggested that the police relied mainly on the  person who saw the boy was being lifted in the car. He didn’t see the act of strangling; neither could he hear what Adnan had to say about this.  The other way round, many may shift the blame on the victim as why did he trust Angel, who was probably a fake identity; and this is probably the reason that the court didn’t want to reply upon the circumstantial evidences that came up from  the Orkut message exchanges. What did the profile owners do? They made the victim to believe them, especially Angel and come out of his home. But for what?  Every individual has right to express and simultaneously every individual has his/her own right to reciprocate or not to reciprocate to the subjects expressed by the other. But that can not be the point to draw up the conclusion and shift the burden as heavy as planning a murder and finally executing the same, to the creator of the message unless the proper nexus is proved.  Perhaps the court felt not to do injustice with these accused on the grounds of this principle................. perhaps not..

I really wish that further investigation takes place when the family goes for appeal  , and this question is answered. If the prosecution can really prove that there lies strong nexus between the Orkut friend’s messages and his murder (may be by someone who was/were operating the profiles), probably a new history would be created in Indian evidence law which is shifting very much towards cyber space happenings.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Did the court do justice to Orkut posts that reportedly called Adnan to see his end?”, 1^st February, 2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/” 

Is India’s national integrity really in danger?

http://www.cybervictims.org

Since December, I was following the ups and downs of the relationship between the 21 websites including Google, Facebook and our government through the court notices and judgements.  The whole issue begun when Vinay Rai, a journalist had notified  the court about defamatory and obscene depictions of Jesus Christ, Prophet Mohammed and various other Hindu deities through a petition in December. the legal provisions that have been used to tie the bells on the cats are sections 292 (sale of obscene books etc), 293 (sale of obscene objects to young person etc ) and section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) ...all from the Indian penal Code which has been used since long to prevent any kind of damage to the image of the rich heritage and culture of a united India along with many other social crimes. The trial  court had issued summons to the websites ; in return, these web giants through their legal representatives in India  preferred a stay petition in the Delhi High court  on the summons issued  by the trial court. They replied that it is simply not possible to filter and monitor the web posts. “Angered” by such reply the Delhi high court warned these web giants that if they fail to monitor, they may face the same fate as had happened in China (see http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/delhi-high-court-to-hear-google-facebooks-petition-today-167302?slider). By the time this blog reaches you my readers, the Delhi High court would have probably created a landmark judgment in the field of Information technology law in India. Without going into the critical analysis of the hypothesis that the court may or may not prefer a judgement on the responsibility of the ISPs, let me tell you that what Rai had noticed is not totally false. I being a member of Orkut and Facebook for  more than 3/4 years, have also noticed the tooth and nail fights  over religious issues in these websites by  individual users.  Also note that Rai has so minutely watched this issue from a holistic perspective and he has not stopped with the abuse of Hinduism only.  True, many have taken sites like Google, Facebook, Yahoo etc to express inner frustration and anger over various issues, including religion. Many times such verbal duets do not lay as written posts in the Google/ Facebook/Yahoo communities or even blogs or walls. They may create huge rift between individuals including religious communities. How many of us could forget one of the  Orkut-community  generated  rift over Shivaji Maharaj in Maharastra?  True ... enmity, hatred etc can be temporarily gagged in a human mind, but such feelings tend to get back to life at the slightest spark and internet can play havoc in this case.  But again, note that I have used the word “many have taken sites....”... leave the political colours while preparing the argument for and against the core reason behind such highlights on this issue (see http://www.firstpost.com/india/social-media-screening-sibals-target-was-political-blasphemy-182117.html), but this is the hard truth that people take internet to express themselves  FREELY and with help of technical tic tacs ..many may do this under  anonymous cloak.  And this is the core reason that  the representation made by Mukul Rohtagi  on behalf of Goolge India, cannot be ignored either. When billions of people throughout the world are crossing boundaries in the cyber space to use US hosted platforms for good as well as bad usage, with or without camouflaged identities, it becomes impossible for any authority to check the legality and illegality of each post. Each of these websites have their own policy guidelines to check the decency of communication and protect themselves from any liability, which are primarily based on section 230(c)(1) of the Communication Decency Act.... a prominent US law. But truly, who cares?........ in this world of busy people having these websites as “hangouts”, every one tends run over the emotions  and feelings of others without noticing what damage is being done.

A ban(if imposed)  may make the web giants aware of their duties. But would it really create any difference with the people who are the actual actors? Probably the forthcoming judgment may make a fraction of people aware of the red line of freedom of speech.. and if it does, it would be huge success for the court, for I expect that these fractions of people  may spread the awareness about how to control one self when in the web world.

Please Note: Do not violate copyright of this blog. If you would like to use informations provided in this blog for your own assignment/writeup/project/blog/article, please cite it as “Halder D. (2012), “Is India’s national integrity really in danger”, 16^th January,2012, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”