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/”

The online abettors for suicide : examples of extreme (mis)use of internet

http://www.cybervictims.org

The past week saw an array of editorials and headlines on cyber security, free speech in the internet and government’s decision to ‘do some thing’ for checking internet contents for curbing hate speech etc. A very small news clipping caught my eyes on 23^rd  November which read “man checks net for suicide tips before hanging himself.”(seehttp://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Chennai/article2652331.ece). The man in the news had apparently everything anyone would have wanted to live a good life. But what I got from the news report is that the police on a first hand search for evidences, found out the internet pages that he was supposedly checking before his death. The pages spoke about suicide, death by hanging, common mistakes people make while hanging themselves etc.  The police booked the case under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code for investigation on unnatural death, which suggests that they are investigating on the issues as why and how did  he commit suicide and whether it was really a death by self strangulation or a cold blooded murder. But what the police would not note was, if this was a death by self strangulation, would the creators of the web-pages, that he was seeing before death,  be taken as ‘aides’ or abettors  for his death? Most of the free speech advocates would laugh at this ‘ridiculous’ point raised by me. But think, how the *right* to expression of some body  has pushed a man to extreme steps.  Still then, to clarify, I had a quick view of  some of the pages which speak about suicides. Some are really dangerous, as they show how to make the death painless. Any human being suffering from extreme depression probably would not stop in testing these steps. But, a further reading showed me the conclusion stanzas of most of these write-ups direct the reader to think something positive. Most of them speak of *living* , leaving these dreadful thoughts. But anyone in ‘madness’ to die, would hardly look at the conclusion. Mostly they will look for the steps to quick ending of the ‘disaster’ called life leaving endless web –writers  in the danger of being called ‘provocative’ or ‘suicide predators’ .

Now that internet is being used for anything and everything, this presents a potential danger for young people, adolescent teens especially who turn suicidal at the slightest of unhappiness. But thinking from the other side, the creators of the web pages who speak about suicide are practicing their own rights to express and their write ups don’t really fall under the category of unprotected speech unless these write-ups are not accompanied by some positive notes or warnings. Under the Indian Penal Code, abettor for suicide is liable for an imprisonment term which may extend to ten years and which may also be accompanied by pecuniary fine under section 306. I don’t know what the investigation reports would suggest for this particular case. But if it is proved that this youth took his own life ‘provoked’ by the suicide method write-ups (off course this may not be the only ‘provocation’) due to extreme depression, could section 306, I.P.C be extended to tap those writers? Probably no, probably yes. Nonetheless,  if the answer is yes, there would be huge hue and cry to fit this Indian provision in the light of US free speech guarantee and safe harbor policies, but this could definitely send a message to the ‘suicide predators’ on internet who specifically target their speech to particular person/s to provoke for suicide.

Think twice before exercising your free speech right. It can take some one’s life.

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. (2011), “The online ‘suicide predators’: examples of extreme (mis)use of internet ”, 10^th December,2011, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/”

All for social networking sites

http://www.cybervictims.org

The Red Cross in Tirunelveli has given a petition to the District authorities to take a serious note of the teenage bike riders, most of whom do not hold proper license, do not know the road safety rules, yet own a ‘dangerously fast’ ambition to create dare devil road show. Today morning the result of the petition was visible in every nook and corner of the city. The police and the Highway petrol were blocking teenagers who were rushing to their schools on their bikes. A good move indeed. These children needed a serious warning from the police, let not be from their own parents or guardians. But the story does not end here. Just a couple of days back a young life ended sadly due to such freak accident. The accident was so fatal that it left deep impact on every body, including the Red Cross who very wisely felt this IS the time to put a STOP for these kids. One mother of another teenager gave me the most shocking news…. Who motivated these kids to be dare devil? Not the movie stars apparently, neither the video games on car races; it was the ‘wish to be a hero through social networking sites ’mindset  of these kids which was the main factor that pushed them to their death.

            Most of these school going teenagers in India are becoming addicted to social networking sites. I have myself checked some of the student’s profiles and was quite numb to see their photo albums. No, it was not sexting; it was neither any other person’s (especially girls) morphed pictures, but some of the pictures did show heroic postures on the two wheelers. These pictures give the kids a great ego boosting, especially when others comment on these pictures. When we were high school/college  students , many  of our classmates, senior school mates  used to get  ‘good lessons’ from their guardians, from our teachers as well as the local elders  when   they tried to impress others, especially we girls by doing (un)heroic activities on their bi-cycles or  on the foot boards of local buses. Using of motor bikes at the age of 16/17 was still a dream for many. Many such ‘heroes’ were thrashed by elders by words like “eta ki circus hochche”?( do you think this is a circus ?). Soon they were reduced to the position of ‘jokers’. But they failed to create such huge impact on their friends and juniors as today’s social networking teens are creating. Indeed, this generation is more matured and smart than our generation. But it pains me to think how this generation is misusing the special networking sites to spread the message of deadly happiness.

Wishing all my readers a happy and safe September.

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. (2011), “All for social networking sites”, 31^st  August,2011, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

The café with better responsibility

http://www.cybervictims.org

Not very long ago, a pub in western India witnessed violent harassment of women. The media showed the glimpses how women were literally thrown off from the premises by some religious extremist groups. Their only ‘crime’ was they entered the premises to have hard liquors. The fundamentalist group contended that drinking culture among women would spoil the Indian cultural heritage, maximum of which is carried out through the behavioral aspects of women in the society. These groups were angry with the pubs ; but they were more angry with the women who ‘dared’ to drink hard liquor in public. This incidence evoked a huge debate in urban Indian societies regarding the pub –culture and also the café culture to a certain extent. I am including café culture here intentionally to denote the growing culture of ‘addiction’ among men and women and legal powers or licenses of the cafes and pubs to provide people some thing to rest their nerves.

It is ironical now as how addiction to cyber space has started getting recognition from behavioral scientists. Not long ago in India cyber cafes were the only places where people could access the internet. Within 4-5 years cheaper rates of broadband had made almost every moderate Indian household to have internet connection. But, cyber cafes still remain as a chosen place to rest the nerves for some. Many visit the local cafes as an alternative when their home net connections are disrupted, some visit the cafes as halt inns when they are on move and are reluctant to carry mobile nets, some visit the cafes to see and connect with the world under camouflage. The last category of people can be dangerous. The recent news about terror threats through the emails showed that many of such incidences have taken place from cyber cafés. People who intend to create trouble with the help of their cyber identities may take to cafes in order to misguide the procedural investigations of the police, for cafes have their own IP addresses which may not match with the actual residing places of the users. No doubt, the government has become strict and vigilant enough in ordering every cyber café to have user’s data written separately in log books through the proposed Information technology guidelines for cyber café rules ) 2011 (section 2bb of this proposed rule defines log register as “a register maintained by the Cyber Café for access and use of computer resource”); the rule has also proposed that the cafes responsibility must also include prohibiting any user from accessing the computer or computer networks established in the café unless

1. the intended user produces a valid identity proof as has been specified under section 4(1) of this Rule;
2. the intended user actually allows the café to store his data through photocopy of the same , as has been specified under section 4(2) of this Rule;
3. if the intended user is a minor , he/she is accompanied by an adult as has been specified under section 4(4) of this Rule;
4.  The accompanying person (if any) of the intended user produces identity data   as has been specified under section 4(5) of this Rule.

This proposed rule has also specified that cyber cafes may also use web cams to have more authentic information about the intended user. In other words, cyber cafes may get full legal recognition under Indian information technology act ,2000( as amended in 2008). Now it is important to note what is the typical legal definition of  ‘cyber café’ under the Indian laws. Section 2 (na) of the Information technology Act . 2000 ( as amended in 2008) defines cyber café as “any facility from where access to the internet is offered by any person in the ordinary course of business to the members of the public.”  Cyber café therefore has been analyzed as a ‘facility’ by the Indian laws, or rather a service provider.

Coming back to my point on real life pub and café culture in India and the protests by the self declared guardians of civil society, it could be seen that whereas real life cafes need only the valid license to serve good and healthy  food , drinks and hot beverages to rest the nerves of common people, the proposed Rule has made these cafes even more responsible towards protection of civil societies. The users of the facilities offered by the café wont be thrown out by the so called guardians of the civil society for their ‘dare devil’ intentions, but these Rules emphasize that this very responsibility should be shifted to the provider of the facility, i.e the cyber café when the users intend to cross the limits to create real harm to the society.  But the message of the law is clear… unless we the common people are not becoming aware of the ‘happening’ hi-tech thefts; no one can save the world from extremism…remember ‘prevention is better than cure’.

Wishing all my readers a belated very happy friendship day.

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. (2011), “The café with better responsibility

”, 8^th August,2011, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

Section 43 Of The Information Technology Act, 2000(amended in 2008) And Pollution Of Computers And Data

http://www.cybervictims.org

Internet is a window to me. Well, it is a window to millions of users like me. This window brings in good inflow of knowledge, some sweet breeze of friendships, economic inflow for some, and also dusty wind which carries viruses.  Even those, who do not access internet from their own computers, may bring to their own “safe computers” or to other’s computers all these unwanted pollutions by secondary methods like CDs, Pen drives, Floppies etc. I bet that every common man, woman or a school going child who uses computer, is afraid of pollution of computer.  There are hundreds of modes to pollute a computer ……nonetheless, hundreds of reasons too for doing this mischievous act. The Indian Information Technology Act recognizes two  most prominent modes of polluting the computer under section 43© , i.e introducing or causing to introduce computer contaminant and computer virus. Note that the mode is a two folded mode, i.e either directly introducing or causing to introduce.  This direct or indirect operation includes introduction of any computer contaminant and/or computer virus to the computer as a machine, computer system and the computer network as a whole.

Look at the draftsmen’s  particular observance on the distinguishing feature of ‘computer contaminant’ and ‘computer virus’….explanation to section 43 says under clause (i) that “computer contaminant” is a term which has been used to indicate “any set of instruction” which is designed to (a) modify, (b) destroy, (c) record, (d) transmit  any data or programme residing within a computer . The term also includes any set of instructions which is designed by any means, to  usurp the normal computer operations. This means that this provision penalizes any or the whole activity done in this course.

             Now, coming to the term “computer virus”, the first thing which came in my mind was the usage of the term “virus” in the very thought provoking movie “3 idiots”. The protagonist and others in the movie named the strict disciplinarian head of the institution “Virus”. It was a short form of his name “Veeru Shasrabudhhi”. But I felt that probably the movie wanted to establish the fact that “Virus” was polluting the minds of young aspirant researchers……………..exactly the way computer viruses pollute the data within the computers which may have been produced after real hard work. The legislation aforementioned in its explanation under clause (iii) clarifies what is meant by the term “computer virus”. It is explained as computer instruction, data or information or programmes that can either destroy, damage, degrade, adversely affect the computer functioning; or can attach itself to another computer resource and operate simultaneously when any data , instruction or programme is executed in that computer resource. The language of the legislation therefore indicates that ‘computer virus’ can include ‘computer contaminant’ too. Nonetheless, computer virus and computer contaminant could be the two prominent modes for hacking, besides monitoring and modifying the contents. Section 43 regulates such pollution of the computer (inclusive of computer contamination and polluting the computer through virus attack) by awarding pecuniary sanction of Rupees 1 Crore which the guilty person has to pay as compensation to the person affected as such.

Taking this provision as the base, hacking and modification of the content by such “pollutions” have also been regulated by Information Technology Act, 2008 under Section 65 (especially when the offense includes destruction , alteration of the computer source code which is required to be maintained by law for the time being in force) and section 66 (which includes all the offences as has been mentioned under Section 43, including ‘polluting’ the computer). Section 65 awards sentence which could be either imprisonment term up to 3 years or  pecuniary sanction which may extend to two lakh Rupees , or both; whereas section 66 awards sentence which could be imprisonment which may extend to three years , or pecuniary fine of  five lakh Rupees, or  both.

Hence do not take computer contamination or virus attacks lightly. If you are a programmer and you are asked to create any such programme, think again how it may affect you if you were the victim. If you are the victim, do not encourage any “techy” to beat the wrongdoer. The law is there to help…..however, how far it can be used and executed, remains still a matter of debates.

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 Debarati. (2011), “Section 43 of the Information technology Act, 2000(amended in 2008) and pollution of computers and data”,9^th June,2011 , published in  http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/

See What Headleys And Kasabs Did For Us

http://www.cybervictims.org

Using the cyber space for spreading extremist ideologies or gaining valuable informations for the purpose of terrorist activities have become a trend now a days. Since the 9/11 incidence, all most all countries are developing stringent laws to  close any single hole through which extremists can pour in the venomous principles in the cyber space. But could the laws really achieve their purposes? Probably no. The examples of  Mumbai attack, London tube attack, the serial blasts that happened in 2008 in many cities in India may prove how laws fail to curb the situation effectively. No wander, extremism can be born in a group discussion in social networking site, in a blog, in open access religious sites . What we get to learn from this? It is not the machine, neither the public site which was probably opened to give thousands of netizens chance to express their views, neither the email service providers who provide their service for genuine reasons which could be made liable, but the human minds which got rotten due to the smell of destruction in the name of protecting some rights. I see government of India’s decision to tighten the ropes on the privacy of individual net browsers through the new Information Technology (reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules,2011 , as a double edged weapon thus. This and the other proposed rules empower the government to seek personal data from the “trusted” sites and even the cyber cafes which promise to give enough privacy to the users.

One of the very prominent example could be found in  today’s report about Headley prosecution case (see  Headley e-mail casts light on ugly world of Shiv Sena fixers  by Swami & Gaikwad, http://www.hindu.com/2011/05/26/stories/2011052667061400.htm).  No, the news report doesn’t say anything on these laws or rules. But what seemed important to me is, how valuable one’s personal data could be when it comes to prosecute extremists and their aids, who may never know in which trap they are being pulled into. It was long before 9/11 US tragedy that many parts of India were receiving even more dangerous terrorist attacks. It compelled the government and the security personnel to have a strict vigil on accommodations which housed ‘outsiders’ as tenants, paying guests and even guests. Well, some had felt that their privacy rights had been infringed, some felt such vigilance was good. But the ultimate result was, common people became more aware about extremists and how they might become aids to extremism without their knowledge. May be  these rules regarding digital vigilance could bring more debates , but at the same time, the physical space anti-terrorism  vigils probably would suggest  that it is better to have a careful caretaker even when in the cyber space.

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. (2011), “See what Headleys and Kasabs did for us

”, 26^th May,,2011, published in http://cybervictims.blogspot.com/