SYLLABUS
GS-2: Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

GS-3:Awareness in the fields of IT, Space, Computers, robotics, nano-technology, bio-technology and issues relating to intellectual property rights.

Context: Recently, the Government of India, through the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), notified the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026, amending the 2021 IT Rules under the Information Technology Act, 2000.

More on the News

• The amendments, effective from 20 February 2026, formally bring AI-generated and deepfake content under structured regulatory oversight for the first time in India.
• The move comes in response to rapid advances in Artificial Intelligence that have enabled hyper-realistic deepfakes, voice cloning scams, synthetic intimate imagery, fake political speeches, and forged electronic records.
• The misuse of such content has led to identity fraud, impersonation, non-consensual intimate content (NCII), electoral misinformation, reputation damage, blackmail, and the circulation of synthetic child sexual abuse material.
• The amendment marks a decisive shift from reactive moderation to proactive prevention by introducing a clearly defined Synthetic Generated Information (SGI) framework.
• It also shortens the earlier 36-hour compliance window to expedited takedowns within as little as 2–3 hours, while aiming to preserve legitimate AI use for education, accessibility, and innovation.

Key Amendments

• Legal Definition of “Synthetically Generated Information” (SGI): For the first time, the Rules formally define SGI as audio, visual, or audio-visual content artificially or algorithmically created or altered in a manner that appears real and depicts individuals or events as authentic.
  • This includes deepfake videos, voice cloning, AI-generated impersonations, and fake certificates or digital records.
  • However, content such as colour correction, noise reduction, subtitles, compression, educational and research material, and accessibility enhancements will not be treated as SGI if it is not misleading.
• Mandatory Labelling and Metadata Requirements: All AI-generated content must be clearly labelled as “Synthetically Generated.”
  • Visual content must carry visible on-screen disclosure, synthetic voice must include audio disclosures, and permanent metadata or unique identifiers must be embedded.
  • Platforms must prevent the removal or suppression of such labels.
  • An earlier draft proposal mandating 10% watermark coverage was withdrawn after industry feedback.
• Prohibition of Illegal Synthetic Content: SGI linked to unlawful acts will be dealt with under existing criminal laws, including the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
  • Prohibited categories include child sexual abuse material, non-consensual intimate imagery, obscenity, false electronic records, impersonation and fraud, and explosives- or arms-related content.
• Drastically Reduced Takedown Timelines: The compliance timeline for court or government orders has been reduced from 36 hours to 3 hours.
  • For nudity and non-consensual intimate imagery, the timeline has been reduced from 24 hours to 2 hours.
  • For urgent impersonation cases, the timeline has been reduced from 72 hours to 36 hours.
  • For general grievances, the response period has been shortened from 15 days to 7 days.
• Enhanced Obligations for Significant Social Media Intermediaries (SSMIs): Large platforms such as Meta Platforms, Google, and X must obtain user declarations regarding AI-generated content, deploy automated tools to verify declarations, apply labels before publication, preserve evidence, and share user information with authorities where legally required.
  • Failure to exercise due diligence may result in the loss of safe harbour protection under Section 79 of the IT Act.
  • However, platforms acting in good faith to remove synthetic content will retain safe harbour protection.
• Quarterly User Warnings: Platforms are required to inform users every three months about prohibited synthetic content.
  • They must warn users about account suspension and potential legal penalties.
  • Warnings must also be displayed during AI tool sign-up.
  • This replaces the earlier annual notice requirement.
• Preventive Obligations Under Rule 3(3): Platforms offering AI tools must deploy safeguards to prevent deepfake impersonation, non-consensual intimate content, child sexual abuse material, fake government documents, and fabricated event videos.
  • This marks a clear shift from reactive removal to proactive prevention.

Concerns and Challenges

• Free Speech and Over-Censorship: The three-hour takedown window may create a “remove first, verify later” environment, which could negatively impact lawful expression and raise concerns under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

• Technical Feasibility: Metadata may not survive screenshots or re-uploads, and detection tools often struggle with sophisticated deepfakes, while automated systems cannot reliably distinguish satire from malicious deception.
• Compliance Burden on Smaller Platforms: While large firms can deploy dedicated compliance teams and AI detection systems, start-ups and regional platforms may face disproportionate operational and financial burdens.
• Role Shift of Intermediaries: Requiring verification before publication shifts platforms from neutral intermediaries to active gatekeepers, thereby altering the traditional safe harbour balance under Section 79 of the IT Act.
• Enforcement Complexity: Since the Rules apply to violations under “any law for the time being in force,” including criminal, election, obscenity, and public order laws, ensuring automated compliance across such a broad legal spectrum presents serious implementation challenges.

About the Information Technology Act, 2000

• It is India’s primary legislation governing cybercrime, electronic records, digital signatures, e-commerce, and electronic governance.
• It provides legal recognition to electronic records and electronic signatures and prescribes penalties for cyber offences.
• The Act is based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).
• It applies to offences committed inside or outside India if a computer system or network located in India is involved, imposing obligations irrespective of nationality or geographic location.
• Objectives:
  • To promote secure electronic commerce and digital transactions.
  • To facilitate electronic delivery of government services and enable legally valid online communication.
  • To impose penalties for cybercrimes such as data theft, hacking, cyberstalking, and identity theft, creating a secure cyber environment.
  • To regulate electronic communication and encourage innovation and growth in the Indian IT and ITES sectors.

Sources:
Newindiaexpress
Thehindu
Indianexpress