It was a warm Friday morning in my home in Delhi where I was spending my summer break. I woke up late and opened my phone, looking at the notifications. When I opened WhatsApp, I saw that they had updated their Privacy Policy.I did not tap 'Agree'. I clicked 'Not Now' and decided to look at it later. Since time was in abundance, I read the Policy to see as to what were the changes WhatsApp had made.The policy started with something like "Respect for your Privacy is coded into our DNA" that sounded assuring but as I kept reading, I found out that the Policy had completely changed from its previous and only version.- It now sought to share information (including messages) with Facebook and its family of companies.- It also sought to send users advertisements and banners based on their messaging history.- It could also retain 'popular' videos and photos for an indefinite period of time. This policy also granted WhatsApp a "worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable, and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, create derivative works of, display, and perform the information (including the content)" that users upload, submit, store, send, or receive on or through their Services.- The minimum user age was now changed from 16 years to 13 years.Facebook's acquisition of WhatsApp in 2014 immediately came to my mind. According to WhatsApp's official blog , the Facebook acquisition would not change the core fundamentals that WhatsApp was based on and WhatsApp would function separately and autonomously even after acquisition. To quote their blog from 2014:"If partnering with Facebook meant that we had to change our values, we wouldn't have done it. Instead, we are forming a partnership that would allow us to continue operating independently and autonomously. Our fundamental values and beliefs will not change. Our principles will not change. Everything that has made WhatsApp the leader in personal messaging will still be in place."But what had happened was far from this sentiment. Facebook had decided to severely compromise the integrity of its users.What I saw on the screen was according to me a very cleverly worded, misleading and vague Privacy Policy. I knew at that moment that something was wrong. My gut feeling told me that when something is hard to understand in contracts, it generally means something is wrong. The section in the old policy namely "The Information WhatsApp Does Not Collect" was completely deleted.WhatsApp had, in my opinion, unilaterally, without the consent of its users, completely changed their Privacy Policy, and the users were unknowingly agreeing to it, without knowing its consequences. I believed this was a breach of the users' trust. User information (including messages) was going to be shared with the Facebook Family of Companies for extremely vague purposes, including ads and banners. But this is what they said in their official blog "When we sat down to start our own thing together three years ago we wanted to make something that wasn't just another ad clearinghouse. We wanted to spend our time building a service people wanted to use because it worked and saved them money and made their lives better in a small way."- WhatsApp's CEOI checked around and found that my cousin who was a doctor, several lawyers who work with my parents and other educated professionals had unknowingly agreed to the new Policy. Several of my friends had also clicked 'Agree'.With a bit of navigating, I found an OPT-OUT option. Even this option was actually not an OPT-OUT as it only provided for an opt-out from receiving commercials etc. They would continue to share information (including messages) with Facebook irrespective of the user opting out or in. It was just a psychological effect given to the average user that they had opted out of the data-sharing with Facebook.I decided to challenge this, after consulting with my lawyer friend Prabhas Bajaj, along with Shreya Sethi, who is also a law student.We prepared a Writ Petition in a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) to present before the Delhi High Court with my mom's help. We wanted the Government to act according to their jurisdiction, and if not, the court to deliver justice to all WhatsApp users, including us.At the first hearing, the Hon'ble Court issued notice to TRAI (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) and UOI (Union of India) to file a response.On the next date, they replied that they did not have any jurisdiction on Internet based messaging services. The Hon'ble Court then heard arguments from our side and was reserving the matter for orders when the lawyer for appeared and said that WhatsApp did not share data and that the only data they had access to was phone numbers and names. This was even though; their Privacy Policy said that they shared messages as well with Facebook.The court asked WhatsApp to file an affidavit in order to clear out the facts, in which they completely somersaulted from what they said in Court. They simply copied and pasted their Privacy Policy and put it into the affidavit.The court decided the matter two days after the final hearing, directing WhatsApp to delete all data belonging to users who delete WhatsApp before September 25. WhatsApp was also directed not to share information before 25 September 2016 with Facebook, even if users continued use of WhatsApp.This gave the users the opportunity to decide whether they want to continue to use WhatsApp or not. And if they will be using WhatsApp, they will now make a consented and informed choice on what messages they exchange with their loved ones, friends, families etc.There are still several outstanding issues in this case. For example, users create the content and if so, do they not have a say in the Privacy policy of such services? Users are the asset base for these applications but they are completely ignored and are sometimes misled too.With the internet being open to the world and the market being so competitive, I believe that the users should own their data and should make the choice on using the best and most secure services possible. And at this point, there are several alternatives in sight. The users' privacy should not be compromised at any point.As of last night, there are reports that consumer groups have petitioned the US Federal Trade Commission to look into the matter and have relied upon the order of the Delhi High Court.Lastly I ask - Is it fair for the postman to read your letter? I don't think so.Also would it be fair for the postman to give your letter to someone else, not knowing what they would do with it?I wouldn't risk it. Would you?

(Karmanya Singh Sareen is a second-year engineering student at Imperial College, London.)