Govt146;s I-T panel toughens norms on data theft, child porn

In other words, the police in India will not be able to book cases on their own under the proposed provision on data theft.

As regards civil liability for data theft, the committee said that the existing provision of making the offender pay compensation was not adequate.

It suggested that the body corporate that ‘‘owns or handles sensitive personal data’’ and is ‘‘found to have been negligent in maintaining reasonable security practices’’ should be liable to pay damages up to Rs 1 crore.

Set up as it was in the wake of last year’s MMS scandal involving two Delhi schoolchildren, the committee suggested the retention of the provision on pornography ‘‘in view of the cultural sensitiveness of our society.’’

The committee nevertheless proposed three major changes regarding pornography.

8226; That the maximum term of imprisonment should be reduced from five years to two years.

8226; That a service provider like baazee.com in the MMS case should be liable for having ‘‘conspired or abetted in the commission of the unlawful act.’’ And not simply for ‘‘having the knowledge’’ of the violation, as the current law says.

8226; If it involves child pornography, the penalty, in keeping with the global trend, should be higher and go up to seven years.

Under the head of ‘‘breach of confidentiality and privacy,’’ the committee recommended a liability of compensation up to Rs 25 lakhs and imprisonment up to one year on anybody who captures or broadcasts an image of ‘‘a private area of an individual’’ without his/her consent and ‘‘under circumstances violating the privacy of that individual.’’

To obviate scope for such a provision being misused, the committee took pains to define each of the terms mentioned in it.

8226; ‘‘A private area of the individual’’ means the ‘‘naked or undergarment clad genitals, pubic area, buttocks or female breasts of that individual.’’

8226; ‘‘Female breast’’ means ‘‘any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola.’’

8226; ‘‘Under circumstances violating the privacy of that individual’’ means i circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy without being concerned that an image of a private area of the individual was being captured; or ii circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that a private area of the individual would not be visible to the public, regardless of whether that person is in a public or private place.