Intermediary can’t decide if content is lawful or not: Twitter tells Delhi HC

In an affidavit filed, Twitter said it can take down content from the platform on being notified about the same by way of a court order or by notification by the appropriate agency

Microblogging website Twitter on Wednesday told the Delhi high court that being an intermediary, it cannot decide whether content on its platform is lawful or otherwise unless it is put to such “actual knowledge”.

Twitter told the court that users take full responsibility for the content they post on the platform. (File image)

In an affidavit filed before a bench of chief justice Satish Chandra Sharma and justice Subramonium Prasad, Twitter said it can take down content from the platform on being notified about the same by way of a court order or by notification by the appropriate agency.

“Information is required to be actioned, when the answering respondent (Twitter) is put to actual knowledge of any content that may be unlawful and has so been determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or by the appropriate government, “Twitter’s affidavit read.

It said the content that is notified to it by way of a court order or by notification by the appropriate agency is then taken down.

“The answering respondent (Twitter) being an intermediary cannot decide whether content on its platform is lawful or otherwise unless it is put to such ‘actual knowledge’,” it said.

The submissions were made while hearing a plea by lawyer Aditya Deshwal that sought removal of such content and permanent suspension of the concerned user’s account that had been posting objectionable” and “blasphemous” posts about Hindu gods and goddesses.

Deshwal had contended that the content uploaded on a Twitter account namely ‘Atheist Republic’ not only had abusive language with respect to Hindu goddesses, but also showed them in vulgar representations in the form of cartoons and graphics.

Earlier, the court had chastised Twitter and remarked that they should have been more careful and sensitive in case of any other religion.

It had also asked Twitter to file its policy with regards to the blocking of accounts.

In response, Twitter told the court that users take full responsibility for the content they post on the platform.

It said that a user enters into an agreement with Twitter when the individual signs up for the platform and this agreement is governed by the laws of the state of California.

Twitter also told the court that an FIR in respect of the offending content put up by Atheist Republic was already registered in December 2020 at Bangalore under sections 153A, 295A, 298,292A of IPC and Section 67A of Information Technology Act, 2000, thus asserting that the matter has become infructuous.

It also submitted that the user account @AtheistRepublic has already been suspended by it for violation of the Terms of Service.

On Tuesday, the petitioner sought time from the court following which the matter was posted for October 28.

Deshwal in his plea has contended that he had intimated the grievance officer of Twitter that the content put by the user---@atheistrepublic--was in grave contravention of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 and non-compliance of the rules shall make Twitter lose its legal immunity provided under the Information Technology Act.

He claimed that Twitter repudiated that the content in the account is not of a category for which it takes action and, therefore, it cannot be removed.