The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has directed WhatsApp not to roll out its upcoming usernames feature in India, issuing a notice to the Meta-owned messaging platform over concerns that the feature could increase cybercrime. The Ministry said it had taken note of WhatsApp’s announcement of a phased global rollout, including India, and questioned why regulatory action should not be initiated under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
According to the notice, the feature could materially increase incidents of online fraud, phishing, digital arrest scams, and impersonation attacks by allowing users to communicate without disclosing their mobile numbers. It also warned that usernames resembling those of individuals, public authorities, financial institutions, and government agencies could facilitate identity spoofing. Consequently, MeitY has asked WhatsApp to submit a detailed explanation, supported by relevant documents, within three days and directed the company not to launch the feature until consultations conclude to the Government’s satisfaction.
Provisions invoked by the Ministry:
- Section 79 of the IT Act, read with the IT Rules, 2021, which links intermediary safe harbour protection to compliance with due diligence obligations, including preventing impersonation, false or misleading information, and deceptive messages.
- Rules 3(1)(b), 3(2) and 4 of the IT Rules, 2021, covering user due diligence obligations and enabling identification of the first originator where lawfully required.
- Sections 66C and 66D of the IT Act, which penalise identity theft and cheating by personation using computer resources or communication devices, along with intermediary liability under Section 79(3)(a).
IFF challenges legal basis: The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) has questioned the legal basis of MeitY’s notice in a statement on X, arguing that it seeks to create a product approval regime without statutory authority. According to the digital rights organisation, the notice “has no clear basis in law” and represents “an attempt by the executive to decide what a company may build and ship, which no statute permits.”
IFF argued that Section 79 of the IT Act is a safe harbour provision governing intermediary liability and “is not a power for MeitY to decide what features the platform may offer.” It further said that Rules 3 and 4 of the IT Rules, 2021 impose due diligence obligations and “cannot be converted into a licensing scheme.” Consequently, IFF urged the Ministry to “stop using Section 79 and the contested traceability rule as leverage to control product design” and instead address impersonation and fraud by enforcing criminal law against offenders rather than restricting platform features.
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]
