India: IT and Internet

The Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act, 2006) was enacted to facilitate the promotion and development of micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs). MSMEs play a critical role in driving economic growth, generating employment, fostering innovation, and contributing significantly to India’s GDP and exports. They continue to serve as a vital pillar of the Indian economy. Over the years, the MSME sector has evolved significantly, driven by technological advancements, the emergence of information technology-enabled systems, and changes in the regulatory landscape.

In mid-September 2026, government sources said Meta Platforms’ Indian operations, Facebook, Instagram and Threads, should no longer be viewed merely as an “internet intermediary” but should also be treated as a “service provider,” arguing that the company’s monetised algorithms actively decide what content gets amplified, distributed and shown to whom. That is a government position, not a new statutory classification, and this article returns to that distinction below.

In Home Box Office Inc & Ors. v. Streamzy.to & Ors. (CS(COMM) 740/2026, 2026:DHC:5967; order dated 27 July 2026), Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani granted an ad-interim injunction against a cluster of rogue streaming websites and, more significantly, refined the mechanism by which such injunctions are extended to the mirror, redirect and alphanumeric sites that predictably follow. The order’s contribution lies in a single, disciplined distinction: between the technical verification that an intermediary may perform, and the adjudicatory determination that belongs to the court alone.

India's semiconductor ambitions are gaining global attention as the country moves beyond fabrication facilities to build an integrated ecosystem spanning raw materials, equipment manufacturing, chip design, and advanced packaging. With strategic partnerships already underway and a target to produce 3nm semiconductors by 2032, India faces the challenge of reducing its 90% import dependence while developing domestic capabilities across the entire value chain.

Cybersecurity regulation in India has, until now, largely spoken to the entity that suffers the breach. The 2022 CERT-In Directions issued under Section 70B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 fixed a six-hour reporting clock on the organisation that detects an incident. The new Guidelines flip the lens onto the entity upstream of that breach, the OEM or technology provider that built the product in the first place. For the first time, vendors supplying software, firmware, cloud platforms, or APIs into India carry direct, time-bound, and independently verifiable obligations of their own and not obligations that are merely passed through a customer contract, but obligations CERT-In itself may enforce.

Across India, educational institutions and businesses that deal with minors have made it a routine practice to photograph children celebrating achievements, post their names and images on social media, websites, and marketing material, share performance data with third parties, and collect biometric or health-related data — all without obtaining verifiable parental consent. These photographs and videos are posted without the child or parent having any meaningful opportunity to review, restrict, or object.

The episode explains how India’s new data protection framework balances the right of individuals to protect their personal data with the need of organisations to process data for lawful purposes.

When competitors bid on your trademark as a Google advertising keyword, diverting customers searching for your brand to their own sponsored links, does that constitute infringement? The Delhi High Court's landmark ruling in the Hindware case addresses this precise question, holding that even invisible use of trademarks in keyword advertising can attract liability and that platforms like Google cannot simply claim neutrality when they actively monetize such practices.

The Delhi High Court dismissed ANI Media's application to restrain OpenAI from using its news content to train ChatGPT, finding that the AI training qualified as fair dealing under Indian copyright law. While the court accepted ANI's copyright ownership, it held that ChatGPT's transformative outputs and the fact-expression distinction in news reporting weighed against infringement, though the ruling remains non-precedential and subject to appeal.