Project
Project
SUBMITTED TO:
MR. AMIT KASHYAP
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF LAW
SUBMITTED BY:
DIVYA AVASTHI (10A037)
GAURAV KARTIKEY (10A042)
PRERNA JAIN (10A053)
NEERAJ MANDIYA (10A068)
NIKITA MAHESHWARI (10A070)
NIRALI SARDA (10A074)
NISCHAY NAGARWAL (10A075)
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 1
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................3
VIOLATIONS OF ONLINE PRIVACY.......................................................................6
PROTECTING ONLINE PRIVACY...........................................................................12
ONLINE PRIVACY PROTECTION UNDER OTHER JURISDICTIONS...............17
CONCLUSION............................................................................................................30
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................31
I.
ONLINE PRIVACY
INTRODUCTION
Page 2
As per oxford Dictionary Privacy means "A state in which one is not observed or disturbed
by other people."1 "Nowhere have we found a wholly satisfactory statutory definition of
privacy" a statement made by Calcutta Committee when it was constituted for making an
inquiry particularly into press behavior in respect of personal privacy. Somehow they were
able to define it legally later in their first report on privacy:
"The right of the individual to be protected against intrusion into his personal life or affairs,
or those of his family, by direct physical means or by publication of information."2
Indian Constitution under Article 21 assures the right to live with human dignity, free from
exploitation. The meaning of the word life includes the right to live in fair and reasonable
conditions, right to rehabilitation after release, right to live hood by legal means and decent
environment.
On the basis of earlier judgments Supreme Court of India and in the case of Unni Krishnan
v. State of A.P3 Supreme Court has provided the list containing some of the rights covered
under Article 21.The list is provided below:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
In this paper we would discuss online privacy which is a subset of computer privacy which is
further related to right to privacy which has already been discussed above. The privacy and
security level of personal data published through the Internet is known as Internet Privacy or
Online Privacy.
Increased usage of technology in todays world has affected the privacy rights of a person as
it has changed the way in which information is being received or sent. Meaning of privacy
1
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/privacy
The Calcutt Committee, Report of the Committee on Privacy and Related Matters, 1990,
p. 7
3
1993 AIR 2178
4
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/art222.htm
2
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 3
5
6
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2357266
http://www.electroniccourts.in/privacylawsindia/?p=13
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 4
II.
http://www.prsindia.org/parliamenttrack/report-summaries/cyber-crime-cyber-securityand-right-to-privacy-3158/
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 5
Phishing: An Internet hacking activity used to steal secure user data, including
username, password, bank account number, security PIN or credit card number.
http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/telecommunications-internet-privacy.pdf
(Accessed on 29-09-2014).
9
http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/safeguards-for-electronic-privacy
(Accessed on 29-09-2014).
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 6
Spam and Offensive Messages: Although the advent of e-mail has greatly enhanced
our communications capacities, most e-mail networks today remain susceptible to
attacks from spammers who bulk-email unsolicited promotional or even offensive
messages to the nuisance of users. Among the more notorious of these scams is/was
the so-called "section 409 scam" in which victims receive e-mails from alleged
millionaires who induce them to disclose their credit information in return for a share
in millions.
10
"Cheating by personation" is a crime defined under section 416 the Indian Penal Code.
According to that section, a person is said to "cheat by personation" if he cheats by
pretending to be some other person, or by knowingly substituting one person for another,
or representing that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other
person really is." The explanation to the section adds that "the offence is committed
whether the individual personated is a real or imaginary person". Two illustrations to the
section further elaborate its meaning: (a) A cheats by pretending to be a certain rich
banker of the same name. A cheats by personation (b) A cheats by pretending to be B, a
person who is deceased. A cheats by personation.
11
Communication device" has been defined to mean "cell phones, personal digital
assistance (sic) or combination of both or any other device used to communicate send or
transmit any text, video, audio or image".
12
http://cybercellmumbai.gov.in/html/case-studies/case-of-fishing.html (Accessed on 3009-2014).
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 7
Electronic Voyeurism: Although once regarded as only the stuff of spy cinema, the
sudden increase in consumer electronics has lowered the costs and the size of cameras
to such an extent that the threat of hidden cameras recording peoples intimate
moments has become quite real. Section 66E has been inserted into the IT Act with an
intention of responding to the growing trend of such electronic voyeurism. The
section penalizes the capturing, publishing and transmission of images of the "private
area" of any person without their consent, "under circumstances violating the privacy"
of that person.
The offence is punishable with imprisonment of upto three years or with a fine of upto
Rs. two lakh or both.
13
Although no maximum limit is prescribed for the fine under this section, Section 63 of
the Indian Penal Code declares that Where no sum is expressed to which a fine may
extend, the amount of fine to which the offender is liable is unlimited, but shall not be
excessive.
14
Hafeez, M., 2009. Crime Line: Curiosity was his main motive, say city police. Crime
Line.
Available
at:http://mateenhafeez.blogspot.com/2009/05/curiosity-was-his-mainmotive-say-city.html (Accessed on 30-09-2014).
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 8
Violation of childrens privacy: With the advent of the age of computers and the
Internet, children have increasingly become exposed to crimes such as pornography
and stalking that make use of their private information. The newly inserted section
67B of the IT Act (2008) attempts to safeguard the privacy of children below 18 years
by creating a new enhanced penalty for criminals who target children.
The section firstly penalizes anyone engaged in child pornography. Thus, any person
who publishes or transmits any material which depicts children engaged in sexually
explicit conduct, or anyone who creates, seeks, collects, stores, downloads, advertises
or exchanges this material may be punished with imprisonment upto five years (seven
years for repeat offenders) and with a fine of upto Rs. 10 lakh. Secondly, this section
punishes the online enticement of children into sexually explicitly acts, and the
facilitation of child abuse, which are also punishable as above. Viewed together, these
provisions seek to carve out a limited domain of privacy for children from would-be
sexual predators.
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 9
Privacy violations-the dark side of social media: Have you noticed how some of
the ads on the websites that you visit seem to be a perfect match to your interests and
past web searches? Is that a coincidence? On the web, it certainly isnt because
advertisers today, go to all lengths to promote their products, even if it means
violating your online privacy. Advertisers can invade your social media privacy and
take advantage of your data in several ways:
Data Scraping: It involves tracking peoples activities online and harvesting
personal data and conversations from social media, job websites and online
forums. Usually, research companies are the harvesters, and sell the compiled
data to other companies. These, in turn, use these details to design targeted ad
campaigns for their products. While one might argue that people are
knowingly sharing personal details on social media and thus, its free for
everyones use, data harvesters dont ask for the owners consent. And this
raises an ethics as well as an online privacy problem.16
15
Shalini Singh, Govt. violates privacy safeguards to secretly monitor Internet traffic, The
Hindu, September 9, 2013, available on http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/govtviolates-privacy-safeguards-to-secretly-monitor-internet-traffic/article5107682.ece
(Accessed on 01-10-2014).
16
http://www.bullguard.com/bullguard-security-center/internet-security/social-mediadangers/privacy-violations-in-social-media.aspx (Accessed on 01-10-2014).
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 10
III.
Page 11
The Information Technology Act, 2000 put the law in place to deal with the present age of
technology, to address issues emerging out of digital content and to regulate electronic
communication, but it could not foresee the country's need pertaining to online privacy. It was
amended in the year 2008 to cater to the country's emerging needs. The amendment
introduced the following provisions which dealt with privacy protection: the power of the
state functionaries to intercept, monitor and decrypt information,17 block access to websites18
and monitor or collect traffic data.19
Prior to this amendment, there was a void in Indian law 20 where interception and monitoring
in relation to internet communications was being carried out under the general provisions of
the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 which spoke about interception but without procedural
framework or safeguards or rules.
This irregularity was considered by the Supreme Court in the case of Peoples Union for Civil
Liberties v. Union of India.21 This case is another classic example of judicial activism
whereby the Apex Court laid down guidelines and principles that forced the Central
Government to issue Rules under the Telegraph Act, 1885 in 1999 regarding interception of
telecommunications. This is one of the most influential cases in the entire privacy paradigm
because it was due to the efforts of the Supreme Court that legislative lacuna was filled.22
It is also significant that the principles and safeguards developed in this case have been
followed in most Indian legislations regarding interception of communications ever since.
The rules framed provided the blueprint for the interference with privacy rights for 'intrusion
upon a persons solitude or seclusion and information collection.'23
Rule 419-A framed under section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act provides that when (a) public
emergency; or (b) public safety situation exists, then an order may be made to issue directions
for interception.
These rules authorized high ranking public functionaries to issue directions for the
interception of messages. Since the section dealt with such mercurial powers, it was instilled
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 12
Under this newly introduced provision, where a body corporate, possessing, dealing or
handling any sensitive personal data or information in a computer resource which it owns,
controls or operates, is negligent in implementing and maintaining reasonable security
practices and procedures and thereby causes wrongful loss or wrongful gain to any person,
such body corporate shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation, to the person so
affected.
The amendment also brings forward a section titled "punishment for violation of privacy."
Whoever, intentionally or knowingly captures, publishes or transmits the image of a private
area of any person without his or her consent, under circumstances violating the privacy of
that person, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years or with
fine not exceeding two lakh rupees, or with both.
Though, the title of the section is worded broadly it seeks to apply only to capturing an
"image of the private area of a person", "under circumstances violating the privacy of the
person."
The circumstances violating the privacy of a person are when such person has a reasonable
expectation that (a) he or she could disrobe in privacy without being concerned that an image
of his/her private area was being captured; or (b) any part of his/her private area would not be
visible to the public, whether such person is in a public or a private place.
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 13
This section was amended in 2008 whereby, the earlier existing provision was substituted by
newly inserted Section 69. The PUCL judgment passed by the Apex Court and Rule 419-A
framed thereafter can be termed as the inspiration for this section. This section is a mirror
image of rule 419-A framed under the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951.
Under this provision, where the Central Government or a State Government or any of its
officers specially authorised by the Central Government or the State Government, as the case
may be is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient to do in the interest of the sovereignty or
integrity of India, defence of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States
or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence
relating to above or for investigation of any offence, it may, subject to the provisions of subsection (2), for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, direct any agency of the
appropriate Government to intercept, monitor or decrypt or cause to be intercepted or
monitored or decrypted any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any
computer resource.
This section provided that any person who, in pursuant of any of the powers conferred under
this Act, rules or regulations made there under, has secured access to any electronic record,
book, register, correspondence, information, document or other material without the consent
of the person concerned discloses such electronic record, book, register, correspondence,
information, document or other material to any other person shall be punished with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to
one lakh rupees, or with both.
Under this provision, any person including an intermediary who, while providing services
under the terms of lawful contract, has secured access to any material containing personal
information about another person, with the intent to cause or knowing that he is likely to
cause wrongful loss or wrongful gain discloses, without the consent of the person concerned,
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 14
24
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2357266.
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2188749.
26
Preliminary of The Privacy Protection Bill, 2013.
25
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 15
IV.
Digital privacy concerns 56 percent of daily Internet users in the U.S., Mexico, Sweden,
Egypt, Pakistan and Thailand, according to a survey by Sweden-based technology company
Ericcson. But only 4 percent of respondents said they would use the Internet less. Instead, 93
percent planned to protect their privacy by taking steps like being more cautious about
personal information they share online.27
Privacy is a fundamental human right recognized in the UN Declaration of Human Rights,
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in many other
International and regional treaties. Privacy underpins human dignity and other key values
such as freedom of association and freedom of speech. It has become one of the most
important human rights issues of the modern age. Nearly every country in the world
recognizes right of privacy explicitly in their Constitution. At a minimum, these provisions
include rights of inviolability of the home and secrecy of communications. Most recently-
27
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/23/2014-consumers-seek-online-privacy
(Last seen 6th October 2014, 1:07 am).
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 16
There are three major reasons for the movement towards comprehensive privacy and data
protection laws. Many countries are adopting these laws for one or more reasons.
To ensure laws are consistent with Pan-European laws. Most countries in Central
and Eastern Europe are adopting new laws based on the Council of Europe
Convention and the European Union Data Protection Directive. Many of these
countries hope to join the European Union in the near future. Countries in other
regions, such as Canada, are adopting new laws to ensure that trade will not be
affected by the requirements of the EU Directive.29
28
29
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 17
Interest in the right of privacy increased in the 1960s and 1970s with the advent of
information technology (IT). The surveillance potential of powerful computer systems
prompted demands for specific rules governing the collection and handling of personal
information. In many countries, new constitutions reflect this right. The genesis of modern
legislation in this area can be traced to the first data protection law in the world enacted in the
Land of Hesse in Germany in 1970. This was followed by national laws in Sweden (1973),
the United States (1974), Germany (1977) and France (1978).30
Two crucial International instruments evolved from these laws, The Council of Europe's 1981
Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to the Automatic Processing of
Personal Data31 and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's
Guidelines Governing the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Data Flows of Personal
Data.32 These laws articulate specific rules covering the handling of electronic data. The rules
within these two documents form the core of the Data Protection laws of dozens of countries.
These rules describe personal information as data which are afforded protection at every step
from collection through to storage and dissemination. The right of people to access and
amend their data is a primary component of these rules.33
The expression of data protection in various declarations and laws varies only by degrees. All
require that personal information must be:
30
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 18
Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 17 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights state that no one shall be subjected to arbitrary
interference with one's privacy, family, home or correspondence, and that everyone has the
right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
On 18th December 2013, The United Nations (UN) has unanimously voted to adopt a
resolution calling for online privacy to be recognised as a human right, the General Assembly
adopted resolution 68/16735, which expresses deep concern at the negative impact that
surveillance and interception of communications may have on human rights. United Nations
member states unanimously adopted a symbolic resolution that declares a worldwide right of
individuals to online privacy, a slap at the US National Security Agency's massive
surveillance programs that have angered Washington's friends and foes alike. The gesture is
politically notable because it shows the world is willing to be seen to do something in the
wake of The Year Of Snowden.36
The resolution urges an end to digital dragnets, without naming the countries. It also calls on
the World Body's Human Rights Commissioner, Navi Pillay, to report on "the protection and
promotion of the right to privacy in the context of domestic and extraterritorial
surveillance."37
34
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 19
There are currently several models for privacy protections extant in various countries. In
some countries, a number of models are used simultaneously.
http://www.ohchr.org/en/hrbodies/hrc/regularsessions/session27/documents/a.hrc.27.37_e
n.pdf (Last seen 6th October 2014, 12:25 pm).
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 20
1. European Union
Law: European Union Data Protection Directive of 1998 & EU Internet Privacy Law of
2002 (DIRECTIVE 2002/58/EC)
The EU tightly regulates consumer data through the European Convention on Human Rights
and its courts. Data collection by member states directly falls under this law. The EU also
regulates the automated collection of data. If information is going to be exchanged between
the EU and the US, American companies that receive the data have to comply with whats
known as the "Safe Harbour" framework, which ensures the companies comply with EU law.
Users from the EU, in fact, are often given greater privacy controls over their online accounts
on sites such as eBay and Amazon because of these laws.40
Each EU country has its own data privacy model to enforce laws, although enforcement
varies greatly between countries. Within the EU, Spain and Germany are widely seen as
swinging the toughest data privacy sticks. Regulators there slap violators with large fines
when they violate consumer privacy rights. Spain, for example, lodges the maximum number
of data protection complaints and hands out the most severe fines in the EU. Spains data
agency has handed out several 300,500 euro ($393,355) fines for illegal data transfers,
according to the law firm White & Case. Germans are sensitive about data privacy too,
40
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 21
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 22
5. China
Law: The Rules Regarding the Protection of Personal Information of Telecommunications
and Internet Users, 2013
Chinas position on internet is clear - it prohibits any websites that it feels will cause a
disturbance within its borders. This definition changes daily and its censorship program
encompasses internet activity from websites to social media feeds. The country does have
several privacy laws on the books. The latest, enacted in 2013 is The Rules Regarding the
Protection of Personal Information of Telecommunications and Internet Users, which
regulates personal information as it pertains to e-commerce. Chinese tort courts have upheld
that privacy cannot be infringed upon and can be liable under the court; its criminal courts
have maintained that telecoms companies are criminally liable for releasing a customers
information. However, it remains to be seen if Chinas new law regarding privacy will do
much, as the older law, The Decision on Strengthening the Protection of Online Information,
45
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 23
46
47
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 24
In 2010, a Spanish citizen lodged a complaint against a Spanish newspaper with the national
Data Protection Agency and against Google Spain and Google Inc. The citizen complained
that an auction notice of his repossessed home on Googles search results infringed his
privacy rights because the proceedings concerning him had been fully resolved for a number
of years and hence the reference to these was entirely irrelevant. He requested, first, that the
newspaper be required either to remove or alter the pages in question so that the personal data
relating to him no longer appeared; and second, that Google Spain or Google Inc. be required
to remove the personal data relating to him, so that it no longer appeared in the search results.
The Spanish court referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union asking:
(a) whether the EU's 1995 Data Protection Directive applied to search engines such as
Google;
(b) whether EU law (the Directive) applied to Google Spain, given that the company's data
processing server was in the United States;
(c) whether an individual has the right to request that his or her personal data be removed
from accessibility via a search engine (the 'right to be forgotten').
In its ruling of 13 May 201448 the EU Court said:
a) On the territoriality of EU rules : Even if the physical server of a company processing data
is located outside Europe, EU rules apply to search engine operators if they have a branch or
48
http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-05/cp140070en.pdf (Last
Seen 6th October 2014, 12:42 pm).
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 25
49
Ibid.
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 26
The Court also clarified, that a case-by-case assessment will be needed. Neither the right to
the protection of personal data nor and the right to freedom of expression are absolute
rights. A fair balance should be sought between the legitimate interest of internet users and
the persons fundamental rights. Freedom of expression carries with it responsibilities and
has limits both in the online and offline world.
The case itself provides an example of this balancing exercise. While the Court ordered
Google to delete access to the information deemed irrelevant by the Spanish citizen, it did
not rule that the content of the underlying newspaper archive had to be changed in the name
of data protection (paragraph 88 of the Courts ruling). The Spanish citizens data may still
be accessible but is no longer ubiquitous. This is enough for the citizens privacy to be
respected.
This is exactly the spirit of the proposed EU data protection Regulation : empowering
individuals to manage their personal data while explicitly protecting the freedom of
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 27
50
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 28
V.
CONCLUSION
Inc. magazine reports that the Internet's biggest corporations have hoarded Internet users'
personal data and sold it for large financial profits. The situation is indeed grave and demands
immediate attention. However, while dealing with the issue of internet privacy, one must first
be concerned with not only the technological implications such as damaged property,
corrupted files, and the like, but also with the potential for implications on their real lives.
One such implication, which is rather commonly viewed as being one of the most daunting
fears risks of the Internet, is the potential for identity theft.
Online data collection by search engines allows Internet businesses to track consumers
online roadmap, everything from the sites they visit to the purchases they make. This poses
52
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 29
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 30
VI.
REFERENCES
Web Refernces:
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 31
(Last
(Last
Page 32
Hindu,
September
9,
2013,
available
on
ONLINE PRIVACY
Page 33