image copyrightGetty Images
July 3, 2023, 12:53 GMT
Last updated 3 hours ago
It seems that confusion will not leave Twitter, especially after its owner, Elon Musk, imposed restrictions on the number of publications that users of the application are entitled to read every day.
The US billionaire announced this “temporary measure”, in an effort to counter significant levels of data “theft” on the site.
After many Twitter users reported they were no longer seeing restrictions on Sunday, some said on Monday that a “limit exceeded” notification had reappeared.
Elon Musk had previously expressed his dissatisfaction with the use of artificial intelligence companies Twitter data in the development of huge language software models.
At the beginning of the application of the new measure, the limit allowed to be viewed was limited to 600 tweets for undocumented Twitter users or those who do not pay subscriptions to the platform, but the owner of the application returned and raised that limit to a thousand tweets on Saturday evening.
There has been no update yet on whether this limit – which is allowed to be viewed from tweets – has changed.
suit against the Indian government
image copyrightGetty Images
photo comment,
Twitter has more than 60,000 users in India, by one estimate.
In July 2022, Twitter sued the Indian government over its orders to block certain accounts and Tweets. Several freedom of expression experts have hailed it as an important lawsuit.
It was the first time a social media company had sued the government over orders to remove content, which are often criticized for being arbitrary and opaque.
Last week, the Karnataka High Court dismissed Twitter’s case and fined the company 5 million rupees ($61,000) for non-compliance with disputed orders for more than a year. Twitter has more than 24 million users in India, by one estimate.
The ruling has left many digital rights experts concerned.
“The ruling imposes unfettered power in the state to issue blocking orders that go beyond procedural safeguards,” said Radhika Roy, a lawyer and spokesperson for the digital rights group Internet Freedom Foundation.
She added that the court could have countered the “pervasive misuse” of the law to remove unfavorable content online, rather than legalizing it.
Commentators are worried about Twitter’s next move. Will the social media giant comply with removal orders or appeal the ruling?
The case was brought by Twitter under its former leadership. Under new owner Elon Musk, the company complied with removal orders.
After a recent meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the US, Musk said the company had no choice “but to comply with local government laws” or risk being shut down.
The latest ruling raises concerns about freedom of expression since the government has been accused of increasing its censorship of online content in recent years. “All foreign internet platforms must comply with Indian laws,” Union Minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar said.
In 2022, India blocked 3,417 Twitter email addresses, while only eight Twitter email addresses were blocked in 2014.
the case
Twitter’s case was that 39 orders from the federal government blocking access to accounts and tweets were against the law, as India’s Information Technology Act allows the government to block online content that “threatens state security” and public order among other things.
She said the government does not have the power to ban accounts, but only specific tweets.
Moreover, she said, the orders were not properly interpreted and that the government did not provide the reasons required to remove the content.
Also, the users whose accounts and tweets were banned were not informed by the government.
The government argued that the orders were legal. It said the disputed content was posted by “anti-India activists” and that if those users were informed of the action being taken against them, they could choose to tweet anonymously and cause further harm.
Therefore, it was appropriate that only Twitter be informed of these orders, the government said.
Since the law requires these orders to be confidential, it is not clear which accounts and Tweets were challenged.
image copyrightGetty Images
photo comment,
Last year, Twitter banned a number of accounts linked to the farmers’ protests.
However, one of the cases cited in the ruling reveals that at least one account posted tweets related to farmers’ protest in 2021 against new farming laws introduced by the government.
The court has now said the government has the power to ban not just tweets, but entire accounts as well.
These orders can be extended indefinitely. She also added that when the government blocks content, the user does not necessarily have to be informed.
By law, users or the company hosting the information – such as Twitter – must be given notice and a chance to be heard in court before a blocking order is issued.
In an emergency, the government can block a website immediately and give later notice.
The orders also need written details of why a website needs to be blocked. Twitter argued that this was missing in the orders issued by the government.
However, the court examined the tweets and accounts in question and found that they contained “outrageous” and “dastardly and anti-national” content that could threaten national security and public order. She said those details were shared with Twitter.
Furthermore, the court accepted the government’s arguments that detailed reasons had been shared with Twitter in review meetings held prior to the issuance of the ban order.
The court also said that giving notice to users was discretionary. The users in question “comprise of terrorists” and “foreign adversaries who intend to defame and destabilize India and endanger national security along sectarian lines.”
Accordingly, the government’s argument that it was “undesirable” to issue a notice to such “anti-India” activists was accepted.
end of the road?
Experts say this ruling limits users’ ability to defend their right to freedom of expression.
Users “will not be given a chance to defend themselves before the blocking order is passed,” said Sachin Dhawan, program director at digital rights research body the Center for Communications Governance.
“Even after an order is issued, they will be left in the dark as to why their content was banned,” he added.
As a result, “the process that was shrouded in secrecy will become even more opaque,” he said. Dhawan added that this undermines “due process” such as giving “notice and hearing” to the aggrieved party.
However, another important case pending before the Delhi High Court may lead to a different outcome.
In the case of a satirical website such as the dowry calculator, it was banned by the government without giving the site’s founder notice.
In May last year, the Supreme Court ordered the government to provide the founder with a copy of the order and grant him a hearing, during which the ban was upheld. The court is now considering whether the site can be blocked.
Roy of the Internet Freedom Foundation said the court’s order to provide a copy to the founder was “hopeful”. However, the final verdict has yet to be decided.
2023-07-03 18:56:15
#Elon #Musk #latest #confusion #Twitter #BBC #News #Arabic
