MeitY Issued an Advisory Regulating AI

Pretext

On 20th October 2022, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,337.76 crores on Google for abusing its dominant position in multiple markets in the Android Mobile device ecosystem, apart from issuing cease and desist orders. The CCI also directed Google to modify its conduct within a defined timeline.  Smart mobile devices need an operating system (OS) to run applications (apps) and programs. Android is one such mobile operating system that Google acquired in 2005. In the instant matter, the CCI examined various practices of Google w.r.t. licensing of this Android mobile operating system and various proprietary mobile applications of Google (e.g., Play Store, Google Search, Google Chrome, YouTube, etc.).

The Issue

Google was found to be misusing its dominant position in the tech market, and the same was the reason behind the penalty. Google argued about the competitive constraints being faced from Apple. In relation to understanding the extent of competition between Google’s Android ecosystem and Apple’s iOS ecosystem, the CCI noted the differences in the two business models, which affect the underlying incentives of business decisions. Apple’s business is primarily based on a vertically integrated smart device ecosystem that focuses on the sale of high-end smart devices with state-of-the-art software components. In contrast, Google’s business was found to be driven by the ultimate intent of increasing users on its platforms so that they interact with its revenue-earning service, i.e., online searches, which directly affects the sale of online advertising services by Google. It was seen that google had created a dominant position among the android phone manufacturers as they were made to have a set of google apps preinstalled in the device to increase the user’s dependency on google services. The CCI felt that Google had created a dominant position to which they replied that the same operations are done by Apple as well, to which the commission responded that apple is a phone and app manufacturer and they have Apple-owned apps in Apple devices only, but Google here in had made a pseudo mandate for android manufactures to have the google apps pre-installed which is, in turn, a possible way of disrupting the market equilibrium and violative of market practices. The CCI imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,337.76 for abusing its dominant position in multiple markets in India, CCI delineated the following five relevant markets in the present matter –

• The market for licensable OS for smart mobile devices in India
• The market for app store for Android smart mobile OS in India
• The market for general web search services in India
• The market for non-OS specific mobile web browsers in India
• The market for online video hosting platforms (OVHP) in India.

Supreme Courts Opinion

In October 2022, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) ruled that Google, owned by Alphabet Inc, exploited its dominant position in Android and told it to remove restrictions on device makers, including those related to the pre-installation of apps and ensuring exclusivity of its search. Google lost a challenge in the Supreme Court to block the directives, as the learned court refused to put a stay on the imposed penalty, further giving seven days to comply. The Supreme Court has said a lower tribunal—where Google first challenged the Android directives—can continue to hear the company’s appeal and must rule by March 31.

Counterpoint Research estimates that about 97% of 600 million smartphones in India run on Android. Apple has just a 3% share. Hoping to block the implementation of the CCI directives, Google challenged the CCI order in the Supreme Court by warning it could stall the growth of the Android ecosystem. It also said it would be forced to alter arrangements with more than 1,100 device manufacturers and thousands of app developers if the directives kick in. Google has been concerned about India’s decision as the steps are seen as more sweeping than those imposed in the European Commission’s 2018 ruling. There it was fined for putting in place what the Commission called unlawful restrictions on Android mobile device makers. Google is still challenging the record $4.3 billion fine in that case. In Europe, Google made changes later, including letting Android device users pick their default search engine, and said device makers would be able to license the Google mobile application suite separately from the Google Search App or the Chrome browser.

‍

Conclusion

As the world goes deeper into cyberspace, the big tech companies have more control over the industry and the markets, but the same should not turn into anarchy in the global markets. The Tech giants need to be made aware that compliance is the utmost duty for all companies, and enforcement of the law of the land will be maintained no matter what. Earlier India lacked policies and legislation to govern cyberspace, but in the recent proactive stance by the govt, a lot of new bills have been tabled, one of them being the Intermediary Rules 2021, which has laid down the obligations nand duties of the companies by setting up an intermediary in the country. Such bills coupled with such crucial judgments on tech giants will act as a test and barrier for other tech companies who try to flaunt the rules and avoid compliance.

Introduction

As the sun rises on a new chapter in the Indian telecommunications narrative, the corridors of power in New Delhi are abuzz with palpable excitement and a hint of solemnity. Here, a groundbreaking proposal stands before the lawmakers of the Lok Sabha, not simply a proposed amendment or update to an existing statute, but the cornerstone of a reimagined communications epoch—the Telecommunications Bill of 2023. In every sense, this legislative masterpiece embodies a country at the intersection of tradition and innovation, eager to part ways with vestiges of colonial infrastructure that have shaped its modern landscape.

The Origins

Steeped in history, India's telecommunications system has persevered through a patchwork of regulations and ad hoc policies, growing somewhat unwieldy under the shadow of the Indian Telegraph Act (1885), the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1933), and the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act (1950). Yet, it is within this context of the old guard, a relic of British administration, that the new Telecommunications Bill seeks to transcend the limitations of the past. It aims to dismantle barriers and create an ecosystem that is fluid, adaptable, and resonant with the rapid cadence of technological advancements and the demands of a population increasingly reliant on digital connectivity.

In crafting this bill, the creators have meticulously knitted together an intricate fabric of vibrant threads, each signifying a pillar of progress. To herald an era of unparalleled growth and dynamism, the bill looks beyond the scope of traditional telecommunication services, boldly embracing the convergence of digital mediums such as wire, radio, and optical fibers, aligning with the modalities of 21st-century communication. The bill’s very essence is innovation, etching a new paradigm through its provisions and signalling India's readiness to interface with the ever-expanding digital frontier.

The Defining Features 

A novel and defining feature of this bill is its departure from a rigid licensing regime. It forges ahead with 'authorizations'—a signifier that resonates with flexibility, adaptability, and a regulatory approach that isn't mired in bureaucratic inertia but is rather an enabler of swift technological adoption and market responsiveness. This transformative philosophy signifies a departure from the byzantine processes of yore, orbiting instead toward an agile governance model that is both responsive to current needs and anticipative of future trends.

The introduction of mandatory biometric authentication for telecom customers articulates an unyielding stance against the rampant misuse of communication networks. Indeed, this measure draws a fine line between the right to privacy and the exigencies of data protection, posing ethical questions that animate public discourse. This balance seeks to thwart unsolicited commercial communication, exemplifying the state's vigil on the sanctuaries of personal space and tranquility.

In addition, the forward-looking bill tactically addresses the strategic use of spectrum resources with an undercurrent of prescience. By granting ‘spectrum assets’ legislative stature through the National Frequency Allocation Plan and enabling operators to adapt through 'refarming', the bill forms a visionary blueprint for resource optimization. It inherently recognizes that bandwidth is not simply a commercial commodity but one that serves the wider canvas of national imperatives, connectivity goals, and developmental aspirations.

Further embodying the dual themes of openness and vigilance, the bill incorporates provisions for interception and the implementation of a 'trusted sources' regime, a tacit acknowledgement of the cybersecurity challenges that loom on the horizon amidst increasing geopolitical strains. These measures exemplify the act of walking a tightrope between the democratic ideals of transparency and the unyielding requirements of state security.

Looking to the skies, the bill embraces satellite technologies, foreseeing their potential in unshackling the remote and marginalized areas from the constraints of terrestrial infrastructure and thus forging a digitally inclusive society. Acknowledging the expanse of the Indian subcontinent, the bill paves the way for an interconnected, digital hinterland via thoughtful satellite spectrum allocations.

Emphasizing the human thread in the digital weave, the reformulation of the Universal Service Obligation Fund into 'Digital Bharat Nidhi' underscores an unwavering commitment to reaching the unreached. It's the crystallization of a promise that every Indian, regardless of geographical and socio-economic divides, will be privy to the lenses of opportunity presented by the digital revolution.

The Watershed Moment 

The introduction of the Telecommunications Bill of 2023 is a watershed moment, a convergence where history and opportunity coalesce, propelling a nation forward with the ambitions of a burgeoning superpower replacing the Indian Telegraph Act (1885), the Wireless Telegraphy Act (1933), and the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act (1950). It carries within its articles and clauses the anticipation of a billion dreams, the catalyst to a regulatory environment that nurtures innovation, equality, and a forward leap into the future. 

Conclusion

Through its comprehensive scope and visionary approach, the bill writes a fresh chapter in India's digital saga. It is an unfolding story, pregnant with the possibilities of a nascent digital age, charting a trajectory for an India poised to define its own digital dome of the sky, under which its citizens will thrive for generations to come. With every legislative step, India crafts its legacy, a narrative of evolution, a tableau that reflects the aspirations of its people and their resolve to embrace the force of technology for the collective good. As this bill advances through the legislative labyrinth, it carries the spirit of a digital renaissance nestled in the heart of the world's largest democracy.

References 

• https://www.livemint.com/industry/telecom/new-telecom-bill-set-to-approve-administrative-allocation-for-satellite-broadband-services-11702876066350.html
• https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-telecommunication-bill-2023

Introduction

In the digital realm of social media, Meta Platforms, the driving force behind Facebook and Instagram, faces intense scrutiny following The Wall Street Journal's investigative report. This exploration delves deeper into critical issues surrounding child safety on these widespread platforms, unravelling algorithmic intricacies, enforcement dilemmas, and the ethical maze surrounding monetisation features. Instances of "parent-managed minor accounts" leveraging Meta's subscription tools to monetise content featuring young individuals have raised eyebrows. While skirting the line of legality, this practice prompts concerns due to its potential appeal to adults and the associated inappropriate interactions. It's a nuanced issue demanding nuanced solutions.

Failed Algorithms 

The very heartbeat of Meta's digital ecosystem, its algorithms, has come under intense scrutiny. These algorithms, designed to curate and deliver content, were found to actively promoting accounts featuring explicit content to users with known pedophilic interests. The revelation sparks a crucial conversation about the ethical responsibilities tied to the algorithms shaping our digital experiences. Striking the right balance between personalised content delivery and safeguarding users is a delicate task.

While algorithms play a pivotal role in tailoring content to users' preferences, Meta needs to reevaluate the algorithms to ensure they don't inadvertently promote inappropriate content. Stricter checks and balances within the algorithmic framework can help prevent the inadvertent amplification of content that may exploit or endanger minors.

Major Enforcement Challenges

Meta's enforcement challenges have come to light as previously banned parent-run accounts resurrect, gaining official verification and accumulating large followings. The struggle to remove associated backup profiles adds layers to concerns about the effectiveness of Meta's enforcement mechanisms. It underscores the need for a robust system capable of swift and thorough actions against policy violators.

To enhance enforcement mechanisms, Meta should invest in advanced content detection tools and employ a dedicated team for consistent monitoring. This proactive approach can mitigate the risks associated with inappropriate content and reinforce a safer online environment for all users.

The financial dynamics of Meta's ecosystem expose concerns about the exploitation of videos that are eligible for cash gifts from followers. The decision to expand the subscription feature before implementing adequate safety measures poses ethical questions. Prioritising financial gains over user safety risks tarnishing the platform's reputation and trustworthiness. A re-evaluation of this strategy is crucial for maintaining a healthy and secure online environment.

To address safety concerns tied to monetisation features, Meta should consider implementing stricter eligibility criteria for content creators. Verifying the legitimacy and appropriateness of content before allowing it to be monetised can act as a preventive measure against the exploitation of the system.

Meta's Response 

In the aftermath of the revelations, Meta's spokesperson, Andy Stone, took centre stage to defend the company's actions. Stone emphasised ongoing efforts to enhance safety measures, asserting Meta's commitment to rectifying the situation. However, critics argue that Meta's response lacks the decisive actions required to align with industry standards observed on other platforms. The debate continues over the delicate balance between user safety and the pursuit of financial gain. A more transparent and accountable approach to addressing these concerns is imperative.

To rebuild trust and credibility, Meta needs to implement concrete and visible changes. This includes transparent communication about the steps taken to address the identified issues, continuous updates on progress, and a commitment to a user-centric approach that prioritises safety over financial interests.

The formation of a task force in June 2023 was a commendable step to tackle child sexualisation on the platform. However, the effectiveness of these efforts remains limited. Persistent challenges in detecting and preventing potential child safety hazards underscore the need for continuous improvement. Legislative scrutiny adds an extra layer of pressure, emphasising the urgency for Meta to enhance its strategies for user protection.

To overcome ongoing challenges, Meta should collaborate with external child safety organisations, experts, and regulators. Open dialogues and partnerships can provide valuable insights and recommendations, fostering a collaborative approach to creating a safer online environment.

Drawing a parallel with competitors such as Patreon and OnlyFans reveals stark differences in child safety practices. While Meta grapples with its challenges, these platforms maintain stringent policies against certain content involving minors. This comparison underscores the need for universal industry standards to safeguard minors effectively. Collaborative efforts within the industry to establish and adhere to such standards can contribute to a safer digital environment for all.

To align with industry standards, Meta should actively participate in cross-industry collaborations and adopt best practices from platforms with successful child safety measures. This collaborative approach ensures a unified effort to protect users across various digital platforms.

Conclusion

Navigating the intricate landscape of child safety concerns on Meta Platforms demands a nuanced and comprehensive approach. The identified algorithmic failures, enforcement challenges, and controversies surrounding monetisation features underscore the urgency for Meta to reassess and fortify its commitment to being a responsible digital space. As the platform faces this critical examination, it has an opportunity to not only rectify the existing issues but to set a precedent for ethical and secure social media engagement.

This comprehensive exploration aims not only to shed light on the existing issues but also to provide a roadmap for Meta Platforms to evolve into a safer and more responsible digital space. The responsibility lies not just in acknowledging shortcomings but in actively working towards solutions that prioritise the well-being of its users.

References

• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/gadgets-news/instagram-facebook-prioritised-money-over-child-safety-claims-report/articleshow/107952778.cms
• https://www.adweek.com/blognetwork/meta-staff-found-instagram-tool-enabled-child-exploitation-the-company-pressed-ahead-anyway/107604/
• https://www.tbsnews.net/tech/meta-staff-found-instagram-subscription-tool-facilitated-child-exploitation-yet-company

‍