The government can order for interception of messages to established telegraph or any person licensed to do so.

Section 51(1)(ii) holds intermediaries liable for hosting infringing content unless the intermediary can show that it “was not aware and had no reasonable ground for believing that such communication to the public would be an infringement of copyright.” 

Various provisions of the Act are important in understanding intermediary liability. S.2(w) defines “intermediary”. S.67(c) provides for the preservation and retention of information by intermediaries, failure of which could attract an imprisonment for a maximum term of three years along with a fine. S.69(3) mandates intermediary to extend facilities and technical assistance when called upon by governmental agencies, failure of which could attract an imprisonment for a maximum term of seven years along with a fine under S.69(4). S.69A(3) can be invoked to provide an imprisonment for a maximum term of seven years along with a fine if intermediary fails to comply with the governmental agency’s directions for blocking the public access of any information through any computer resource. S.69B(3) mandates intermediary to extend facilities and technical assistance to the governmental agencies for monitoring and collecting traffic data or information through any computer resource for cyber security, failure of which could attract an imprisonment for a maximum term of seven years along with a fine under S.69B(4). S.70B(6) authorises Indian Computer Emergency Response Team to call any intermediary for obtaining information or giving other direction, and failure to comply with such direction could attract an imprisonment for a maximum term of one year or fine under S.70B(7). S.72A provides punishment in cases of disclosure of user information by intermediary breaching lawful contract, which can be either an imprisonment for a maximum term of one year or a maximum fine of 5lakh rupees or both. Finally but crucially, S.79 provides an exemption to intermediaries from liability for publishing or hosting any third party information, data, or communication link if it has observed due diligence.

Rule 6 places responsibility on the intermediary to maintain secrecy and confidentiality of information against any unauthorised monitoring or collection of traffic data or information. It provides for intermediary liability under relevant provisions of law in case of violation either by intermediary or its employees.

Rules 12 and 13 empower the Designated officer to take legal action under Section 69A(3) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 against an intermediary by punishing them with an imprisonment for a maximum term of seven years along with a fine in case of non-compliance of the rules.

These Rules, implemented under Section 79(2)(c) and Section 87(2)(zg) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, lay down due diligence conditions to be followed by intermediaries. 

Rule 75 provides for the removal of infringing content upon the receipt of information about the same from the owner of the copyright.

The proposed draft of the Amendment rules was released by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) on 24th December 2018 inviting comments or suggestions before the deadline of 15th January 2019 which was further extended to 31st January 2019 along with a deadline of 14th February 2019 for counter comments. Currently, the updated draft is undergoing discussions in MeitY. MeitY had earlier informed the Supreme Court that the notification process shall be completed by 15th January 2020, but the same has not been completed as of December 2020.