On October 22, 2025, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) released the Draft Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2025 (“Draft Rules”). These amendments come amidst public and government concern over “deepfakes” and other forms of generative AI, or “synthetically generated information”.
The stated objective is to further the government’s vision of an Open, Safe, Trusted, and Accountable (OSTA) Internet by strengthening the due diligence obligations for intermediaries, including social media platforms and generative AI tools that enable the “creation or modification” of synthetically generated content. A key feature of the draft is its mandatory labelling requirement, which directs both creators and hosting platforms to ensure that all AI-generated or modified content is clearly marked as synthetic through visible labels or embedded metadata.
The Draft Rules are currently open for public consultation until November 6, 2025, with stakeholders invited to submit feedback via email to [email protected].
Download the policy brief here
In this brief, we have looked at the following provisions:
- Definition of “synthetically generated information” under Rule 2(1)(wa) and its implications for AI-generated content.
- Obligations for “creator” platforms to ensure permanent labelling or metadata tagging of synthetic content.
- Duties for social media intermediaries to verify user declarations and clearly label synthetic content.
- The new safe harbour proviso protecting intermediaries for content removal under Rule 3(1)(b).
We think the following would be its key impacts:
Advertisements
- Undefined terms like “reasonable technical measures” could lead to arbitrary enforcement and technical overreach.
- The definition of “synthetic content” risks capturing benign edits or filtered media alongside deepfakes.
- Platforms may more readily remove content if flagged, thereby avoiding liability and potentially stifling parody, satire, and artistic expression.
- Extending safe harbour to AI companies may dilute responsibility while burdening intermediaries.
These proposed rules mark India’s first concrete attempt to regulate AI-generated content. However, without clearer definitions and feasible enforcement standards, they risk incentivising over-regulation rather than protecting against genuine harm.
Also Read:
Support our journalism:
For You
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
