Navigating Trolling and Internet Defamation: Unveiling the Shadows of the Web

“We live in an age today where people are short on their patience, they are short on their tolerance, they are short on their patience – which has reminded me to be brief – but people are also short on their tolerance because we are not willing to accept perspectives which are different from our own”, said Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud while expressing his concerns over the shoot in the internet trolling and fake news, while addressing an event earlier this year in Delhi on law of globalisation.

What is Trolling?

As rightly expressed by C2 UK, Trolling is a type of fishing from a boat, where the bait (on a line) is dragged through the water in an area likely to contain the sought-after fish. The canonical internet troll is named because of the similarity to this fishing behaviour - the troll is dragging the bait (argument) through the target area. The fact that trolls are also malignant faerie that live under bridges also plays into this name. [Trawling is net fishing by surrounding a school of fish with a large net - quite a dissimilar tactic]

Jurisprudence around the subject

Well in humbler terms, a?troll?is an Internet or Cyberspace argot for an individual who deliberately and purposefully attempts to prompt and instigate conflict, resentment, antipathy or dislike in an online connected social community, mostly through a Social Media Platform. Trolls often use provocative and stirring posts to aggravate and incite expressive, emotive retorts from persons, disrupting otherwise civil discussion. Trolling could befall anywhere that provides for an open platform for people to freely post their thoughts and opinions and could include the comment sections of YouTube, forums, or chat rooms. It is important to note that most people are driven by?positive social rewards wherein they experience positive feelings after engaging in warm and welcoming behaviour in social media. Trolls, nevertheless are a bit unalike and comprises higher echelons of negative social potency.

Law and Applications

Now something which makes the subject interesting and thought-provoking is the fact that to some degree a troll does not necessarily at all times be insulting, snide, or even impolite. Only the crudest, most obvious, forms of trolling can be classified nasty and offensive, meanwhile most of the trolls find oneself to be lost in obscurity. Furthermore, it is captivating and certainly perturbing that India does not have any law to deal with trolling which would mean that if a person finds oneself to be a victim of trolling, instigating conflict and resentment, he or she is felt with no remedies ideally. Few years ago, section 66A of IT Act had some authority over the same but the same was found to be unconstitutional and scraped by the Supreme Court of India in the year 2015 in the Shreya Singhal v. Union of India AIR 2015 SC 1523. But online trolling may attract section 67 & 67A, under Information Technology (Amendment) Act 2008, if the troll publishes or posts any offensive content on the cyberspace or internet broadly. It is apposite to note that the legalese expression in the section 67, provides for using lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or which may tend to deprave or corrupt persons. These words are wide enough to include any offensive comment; even it may not be sexual in nature and a troll could be jailed for up to 3 years with a fine of Rs.10 lakh under Section 67?IT Act. A repeat offender can be punished with 7 years of imprisonment with the same fine. There are provisions in offline law with immeasurable power and authority that could be accommodating in horrid and callous circumstances, if it arises and these are Defamation under section 499 IPC. In addition, a circumstantial trolling involving any sort of sexual favours from women or outraging her modesty shall include Sexual Harassment under section 354A IPC, Online Stalking under section 354D IPC, section 509 IPC, and under special circumstances, under section 507 IPC for criminal intimidation. The trolls are in a habit of deliberately posting the imageries (including private areas of the person). This action of the troll can muster the wrath of?Section 66E of The Information Technology Act 2000.?This Act is created for the protection of privacy of the individuals.

View of Indian Courts

In Avinash Bajaj v State, (N.C.T.) OF DELHI. (2005) 3 CompLJ 364 Del., the Hon’ble Court ruled that anyone who publishes, transmits, or causes to be published in electronic form any material that is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest, or if its effect is such that it tends to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, taking all relevant circumstances into account, to read, see, or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be punished.

Complaint of trolling

The cybercrime complaints can be registered with the cybercrime cells across India. The process of filing the cyber complaint is both online and offline, and the victim could select the process rendering convenience. The easiest option would still be to register an online complaint on National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal at?https://cybercrime.gov.in/. It is not necessary for the victim to register the complaint in the cybercrime cell of the city in which he or she is residing or where the crime was committed (having the causal connection) since cybercrime is under the realm and ambit of universal soke i.e., the complaint with regard to cybercrime could be registered by means of any of the cybercrime cells established in India, whatsoever. In case the victim does not have access to any of the cybercrime cells, he or she can lodge an FIR under Section 154 of Code of Criminal Procedure at the local police station. If the cybercrime committed against the victim is a cognizable offence under Indian Penal Code, then it would be mandatory for the police officer to lodge the FIR. If the police officer rebuffs to file the complaint of the victim, the victim shall make the written complaint to the Judicial Magistrate of his or her district who sequentially would direct the police officer to set in motion the investigation.?

Global Development

The United Kingdom has endeavoured to effectively stop trolling by bringing in to effect laws viz. The Malicious Communications Act, states that anyone who sends a letter, electronic communication, or article of any kind to a person that contains an indecent or highly offensive message, a threat, or false information, or causes distress or anxiety to the recipient or any other person is guilty of an offense. Manifold criminal reports and subsequent convictions have been registered in the United Kingdom based on this statute, as well as other statutes, albeit for a brief period of incarceration. Cyberbullying, as well as trolling, where abusive posts are made public, has become a criminal violation in Japan, the United States, and several European countries. Recently, in the year 2021, Australia brought in effect Online Safety Act 2021 allowing the e-Safety Commissioner to order social media companies to remove bullying or harassing content within 24 hours, or face a A$555,000 fine. Crucially, it also gives the commissioner powers to demand information about the owners of anonymous accounts who engage in online abuse.

What could India learn?

India does not perceive trolling as a most significant subject of issue as of yet. It is still typically considered as light hearted social media witticism by commonalities. But it has its own concealed and secreted problems as well like many other subdues within other technologies. Trolling is a rising matter in question globally and even in India, wherein the number of complaints registered has gone up enormously. Trolling has been found as a very fitting opportune means to affront, slur and demean any person while preserving the anonymity of their identity which is further a matter of concern. This makes the situation so compromising on the end of the victim and many a times they are subjected to undue demands as well. This is a rising concern and therefore, firstly needs be acknowledged. The Courts in India have done a tremendous job of having firstly recognised trolling as an issue of an utter concern.

Secondly, on the policy front what needs to be understood is the fundamentals on which the trolling operates, i.e., mostly social media platforms. Social media companies already collect users’ details on sign-up, including their name, email address, country of residence and, increasingly, telephone number, a certain power to the desired authority to demand information about the owners of anonymous accounts who engage in online abuse, could be though about, though abiding by the Global Data Regulation Policy (GDPR), and similarly placed global regulations including the most recently the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2023 (if passed by both the houses of the Parliament). But the concern still would persist for many social media platforms, as there is nothing to stop users setting up an account with a fake name, using a throwaway email address or a “burner” phone, and then ditching all of that but maintaining the account once the information has been initially verified. Furthermore, social media companies might fail to provide information about the offending poster of troll, if they themselves fail to know or have access this information at all. Even if the information provided is correct, it doesn’t mean the person would necessarily answer their phone or respond to an email. The standard?“reasonable person” assessment in law?would likely find not, meaning any defamation action brought against the company itself would likely fail.

Takeaway

Trolling is the new generation of cybercrime and trolls are the new generation of criminals on the internet who gets the sadistic pleasure to feast this online crime of hatred. Ideally, ignorance is bliss, though if looked-for the law has ample authority to punish the poster. Be safe over Internet.

Analogue Legal