Zoo Station

I just discovered that the IIPM fracas has been picked up by CNET News, and via CNET, the story has made it to the New York Times website. Pavan Duggal makes some very interesting points regarding the legality of it all, touching briefly on the impossibility of obtaining identifying information from Google. As I mentioned in a previous post, this is a key issue, the fact that IIPM dragged Google into the mud as well (by claiming that Google compromised user privacy), in its desperate attempt to slime Gaurav, Varna, Rashmi etc.

The case has also raised a fundamental legal issue--can a blogger be sued for defamation, just as a journalist or editor of a print periodical? The Indian Penal Code covers defamation in traditional media, but digital content falls under the purview of the IT Act of 2000, which is silent on defamation. "The present case represents a landmark opportunity to determine the legal view on the rights and liability of bloggers," said Pavan Duggal, a supreme court attorney and head of a cyberlaw consulting firm, Pavan Duggal Associates in New Delhi.

"The matter becomes more interesting when the blogging site is located outside physical territorial boundaries of India. It throws up ticklish and complicated issues concerning jurisdiction in cyberspace," Duggal said. "In the present case, since the blogging site is physically located in the U.S., governed by strict U.S. privacy laws, it is very difficult to get the relevant details about the blogger and his activities from the blogging site, including logs."