“The fundamental problem with the rules that have come out is that they are, in a sense, collapsing two entirely separate regulatory logics [together]. One that is meant for, I think, the IT rules [is] about platform accountability and liability. And the stuff about labelling and content provenance is really to do with governing AI technology, right? And I think that by conflating AI oversight with the liability regime, we are essentially creating outcomes that are not needed and a lot of confusion,” a participant pointed out during MediaNama’s discussion ‘Regulating for Deepfakes in India’ on November 5.
The discussion focused on a draft amendment to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. This amendment aims to legally define synthetically generated information, mandate labelling, watermarking, and metadata embedding for such content. Also, it requires user declarations, automated verification by Significant Social Media Intermediaries (SSMIs), and due diligence obligations for intermediaries that facilitate or host synthetic content.
Discussing the responsibilities of social media platforms (classified as intermediaries under the IT Act and Rules), the participant argued that platforms should only be responsible for user behaviour and content moderation within the bounds of safe harbour.
[Note: The bulk of the discussion was under the Chatham House Rule, under which participants’ remarks names and affiliations cannot be disclosed. Where speakers specifically waived this rule, we have added attribution to their comments.]Social media platforms’ responsibility under the draft rules:
One of the biggest points of contention is whether social media platforms (and not platforms generating synthetic content) have labelling responsibilities as well. Addressing this, former Senior Director at the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), Rakesh Maheshwari, suggested that, based on his interpretation, users are responsible for declaring synthetic content when they upload it on a social media platform.
“If it has been synthetically generated and that’s where maybe the platform puts a mark and gives metadata to be able to prove the provenance, and if it is passing through multiple kinds of platforms, naturally, the size of the file will keep on increasing. Hopefully, if nothing is removed, the traceability gets established, and maybe any platform that is used for uploading also gets noted,” he explained.
Outside of labelling, participants explained that when users upload content to a social media platform, it ends up transcoding such content: a process via which a file can end up losing its metadata. They suggested that, given the metadata embedding requirements, social media platforms could end up liable for the metadata loss.
What should platforms do in case users do not declare synthetic content?
Elaborating on…
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]
