The Supreme Court has urged the Indian government to create guidelines for social media content regulation, addressing issues of hate speech, misinformation, and national security threats. The court recommends revisiting the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 to enhance regulatory provisions and create a safer internet space for Indian users.

In a major development, the Supreme Court of India has demanded more stringent controls over social media content, expressing fears about the unregulated dissemination of hate speech, false news, and possible threats to national security. The court's order comes in the backdrop of the high-profile Allahabadia case, which highlighted the need for more stringent regulation of online platforms.

The Supreme Court has called upon the government to revisit and amend the current laws, especially the Information Technology Act, of 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. The aim is to implement stricter measures that will be able to hold social media companies liable for the content they host.

If adopted, the suggested regulatory initiatives would have significant implications for the likes of YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and X (previously Twitter). Tighter compliance procedures may result in more stringent content moderation rules, heightened scrutiny of user-generated material, and possible penalties for non-compliance.

Legal professionals are of the view that regulation is needed but has to be a balance between free speech and ethical online debate. The Supreme Court ruling has also initiated debates among policymakers, social media platforms, and civil rights organizations. Whereas supporters of regulation hold that unfettered social media content generates misinformation and social unrest, others caution against overregulation that will quell free speech.

The government will likely consider amending the current IT laws and adding new content monitoring mechanisms. The court has also recommended more accountability from social media sites, pushing them to actively detect and delete objectionable content before it reaches a wide audience.

With India traversing the intricate terrain of social media regulation, the intervention of the Supreme Court is a watershed moment for digital regulation. Whether this translates into tighter controls or a balance of online free speech will depend on the reactions of the government and stakeholders to the court's appeal.

Despite mounting privacy concerns among parents, educators, and advocacy groups, a federal judge has ruled in favor of Doge Team, an Elon Musk-funded education platform, permitting it to access and collect student data.

The move, announced on February 17, lets Doge Team collect and review students' academic records, internet browsing activity, and other personal data to strengthen its AI-based learning platform. While proponents claim this will revolutionize adaptive education, opponents caution about significant privacy hazards and data abuse.

Doge Team is an AI-based learning platform that uses machine learning algorithms and monitoring of data in real- to optimize student learning outcomes. According to the site, it provides performance data, adaptive learning tools, and personalized study plans to help students reach their maximum potential.

However, because of its data-based strategy, which requires unrestricted access to student data, there are now significant ethical and security concerns. Privacy organizations and academic institutions have strongly opposed the new verdict, raising concerns about serious dangers connected to the gathering and use of student data. 

A pernicious precedent has been created by this ruling, allowing corporations to extract student data under the guise of 'enhancing education.' Once that door is opened, it is hard for the uses to which such data is put to be policed," is stated by Lena Thompson, director of the Digital Privacy Alliance.

The federal judge determined that Doge Team's collection methods of data adhere to federal education statutes, including the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which regulates the access and use of student records. Legal professionals point out that this reading of FERPA potentially undermines student privacy protections, setting the stage for additional education technology platforms to require similar access.

The ruling will be challenged and legislated against, advocacy groups are already demanding more control over student data use. Simultaneously, Doge Team has said that it is working to develop its platform further and add new AI-based learning functionalities, sparking more controversy regarding technology in schools.

Vaikunta Baliga College of Law will be hosting the highly awaited Advocate P. Shivaji Shetty National Moot Court Competition, which will offer a stage for law students from all over India to showcase their advocacy skills in a competitive setting.

This nation-wide contest will be conducted with students of LL.B. (3-year/5-year courses) studying in institutions of law all over the country. All teams of competitors will have two speakers and a researcher, who will present arguments in the mock court situation.

The competition will test the students in issues of legal skills, sense of strategy, and capacity to present simple arguments under stress.

Prestigious Awards & Recognition

In addition to the priceless experience, the competition also carries substantial cash awards:

Winning team: ₹50,000

Runners-up: ₹30,000

Nonetheless, the competition is not merely about money and trophies. It is a rigorous training ground for prospective legal professionals, giving them real advocacy experience.

The participants will hone their legal thinking, research, and courtroom manners, readying them for the rigors of a professional legal career.

Registration & Participation

Teams that wish to compete are required to register prior to the deadline by providing the necessary forms and fees. With some of the country's best law students likely to be in attendance, this competition is set to be an exciting and intellectually challenging experience.

As Udupi gets ready to host the next generation of legal minds, this moot court competition is a reflection of the excellence and commitment of India's future legal professionals.

The Delhi High Court has urged the Bar Council of India (BCI) and Delhi University (DU) to implement online classes for those law students who have been wanting to attend. This is made with the motive to help such students who find it difficult to attend regular classes for one or another reason.

The judge's suggestion arose from a request by a student of law, who was disqualified from sitting for exams because she had not acquired the required attendance. The law student contended that the obligatory 70% attendance requirement for law classes was unjust and subject to review.

Incorporating online classes for students with attendance deficiencies is a significant step toward ensuring flexibility and equity in education. The DU and BCI have been asked to develop a system whereby students can cover up for attendance shortfalls within a specified time.

DU needs to implement this suggestion as early as possible. Providing online classes to law students with attendance issues will make the learning environment more inclusive and flexible.

This is done to help students who cannot attend regular classes for one reason or another. The court suggested a petition from a law student who was not allowed to sit for exams because of low attendance. The student had claimed that the 70% attendance requirement in law courses was unjust and required review.

Initiating online classes for students with attendance deficits is a significant move towards encouraging flexibility and fairness in studies. BCI and DU have been called upon to introduce a mechanism through which students can cover up for attendance deficits within a specified period.

DU ought to adopt this recommendation urgently. Providing online classes for law students who are not able to manage attendance will serve to establish a more inclusive and flexible learning experience.The Delhi High Court has ordered DU to put the attendance record of every student on the notice board, giving students a clear picture of lectures and practicals attended. The court has also advised that students should be provided an opportunity to plead their cases in respect of short attendance, where a fair hearing would be granted.

The suggestion of introducing online classes for law students with attendance deficits is a crucial move towards encouraging flexibility and justice in the education sector. The BCI and DU have been asked to develop a mechanism for online classes through which students can compensate for attendance deficits within a limited period.

This innovation is anticipated to help many law students who experience attendance shortages for one reason or another, such as health problems, family crises, and other personal factors. The introduction of online classes will give students a chance to catch up on lost classes and finish their law degrees without any obstacles.

The proposal from the Delhi High Court is an appreciable development, and BCI and DU should immediately put into effect the recommendation. Institution of online courses for law students who lack sufficient attendance will go a long way in ensuring inclusive and flexible learning