hidden

By Asheeta Regidi

While Google Maps and similar services have made our lives easier, they have also created a huge risk due to the volumes of easily available geolocational data. The Pathankot attacks brings this to light as geolocational data was collected from the smartphones of thousands of Indian army officers to aid this attack. Post the attack, several of Google’s online maps showing sensitive defence and nuclear power installations were brought under the scanner of the Indian Government. There is a definite lacuna in the law to deal with this information. The recently released draft Geospatial Information Regulation Bill, 2016 (the Geospatial Bill) was released on May 4, 2016 by the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs in an attempt to regulate geospatial data. However, the draft Bill creates more problems than it resolves and has been facing widespread criticism since its release.

An overly broad definition of 'geospatial information'

The main issue with the Geospatial Bill is in the very broad definition of ‘geospatial information.’ As it stands, any collection of GPS data falls under the purview of the proposed rules. This includes any mapping service, maps used by services such as Uber and Ola, an office location indicated on a map on a website, even a picture with geolocational information that you uploaded to Facebook. A full list of entities impacted is available here.

Even a correction of this definition, limiting its scope can resolve the problems of the Bill. If allowed to remain, the result is quite a draconian law which will affect almost every individual in India and abroad. Section 2(1)(e), which defines this term, consists of three categories of information.

The first is ‘geospatial imagery or data acquired through space or aerial platforms such as satellite, aircrafts, airships, balloons, unmanned aerial vehicles including value addition’. If the provisions of the Geospatial Bill are read keeping this specific set of entities in mind, i.e., entities which directly obtain geospatial data from space or aerial platforms like those described above, then the Bill appears quite reasonable. The actual provisions of the Bill are much broader than this. Even data acquired indirectly through space or aerial platforms, such as an app which uses Google Maps, will also come under its purview.

The second category of information is even more problematic, which includes 'graphical or digital data depicting natural or man-made physical features, phenomenon or boundaries of the earth’. This is broad enough to include even a photograph, such as a picture of a man-made object, such as a building.

The third is ‘any information related thereto including surveys, charts, maps, terrestrial photos referenced to a co-ordinate system and having attributes’. This broadens the categories even further, impacting just about ‘any information’ related to the first two categories.

Everyone will need a license. Everyone

Considering that every single person involved in the online world has put up geospatial information at some point or the other, practically every such person has to compulsorily apply for a license to the 'Security Vetting Authority' (the SVA). Under the proposed bill, a new application will have to be made every time a person even wants to add a location tag to a photo on Facebook or Twitter. What makes matters worse for the SVA is that all these millions of applications will have to be disposed of within a time frame of 3 months!

If the existing scope of the Bill continues to remain, it will create trouble not just for every individual in India, but also for the agencies created under the Bill itself for the purpose of enforcing the Act. Under the Bill, any person acquiring or publishing any geospatial information has to apply for a license to the SVA. The penalty for not making such an application ranges from Rs 1 crore to Rs 100 crore, and 7 years of imprisonment. This requirement is imposed not only on persons who are intending to acquire or publish any such information, but also on any persons who have acquired or published such information in the past.

Current laws may already be adequate, but are not being enforced

The Bill also punishes any wrong depiction of a map of India, including any wrong depiction on the internet. The penalty for this is a fine ranging from Rs 10 lacs to Rs 1 crore, and imprisonment of up to 7 years. The penalization of depicting wrong maps of India is actually not new. Incorrect maps are punishable under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1961 with imprisonment of upto 6 months and a fine. The Ministry of Defence also issues a Map Restriction Policy, which is enforced by the Surveyor of India. This has imposed restrictions such as specifying restricted areas that cannot be mapped, such as northern, north-eastern and coastal regions. Companies like Google are, therefore, already answerable to the Indian government for incorrect maps or maps showing restricted areas. This can be seen in the form of actions taken in the past. For example, the Survey of India initiated action against Google in 2014 and Al Jazeera in 2015 for incorrect maps. Why then did the Government need to issue this newer penalty? The real issue is the lack of adequate enforcement of the existing laws.

The bill needs a more progressive approach

Existing laws do cover the use and publication of geolocational data. However, these laws applied to an era when services like Google Maps had not exploded. Rules such as restricting export of maps made sense from a point of security in that era, but are meaningless today. Crowdsourcing of geolocational information, the use of Google’s MapMaker for example, have changed the very concept of map creation. There is no question that the issue of geolocational data in cyberspace has to be addressed. But instead of keeping up with the times, the government appears to be attempting to subject new age geolocational data to an archaic regulatory system. This Bill directly follows the issue of a draft National Geospatial Policy (the NGP) by the Indian Department of Science and Technology, in April 2016. As regressive as the Geospatial Bill is in its approach to the regulation of geospatial data, the NGP is just as progressive. The Government needs to take a relook at the Geospatial Bill and bring it line with the intentions set out in the NGP.

The author is a lawyer with a specialisation in cyber laws and has co-authored books on the subject.