India's New Social Media Rules Spark Concerns Among US Tech Giants
Just days after India and the United States announced a framework for an interim trade deal aimed at reducing non-tariff barriers in digital trade, the Indian government has introduced stringent social media regulations that could significantly increase the regulatory compliance burden for technology companies. These new rules, which mandate the removal of flagged content within two to three hours, are being viewed by many as a potential non-tariff barrier, particularly impacting American social media firms operating in India.
Shortest Takedown Window in the World
On February 10, the IT Ministry notified amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Under these fresh regulations, social media platforms are now required to remove content within two to three hours, a drastic reduction from the previous 24 to 36-hour window. Industry executives have highlighted that this two to three-hour timeline is the shortest takedown window prescribed by any government globally, setting alarm bells ringing within tech companies.
The rules apply to a wide range of content deemed unlawful by law, not just AI-generated material. Specifically, platforms must remove non-consensual intimate imagery within two hours, down from 24 hours earlier, and other forms of unlawful content within three hours, compared to the earlier 36-hour requirement. This change is expected to face significant pushback from big tech firms, who may raise concerns about the heavy compliance burden. Failure to act within the new timelines could result in a loss of safe harbour, a critical immunity that protects platforms from legal actions for hosting user-generated content.
Lack of Consultation and Technical Feasibility
Tech companies have expressed frustration over not being formally consulted before the changes were notified. While the measure impacts both local and non-US companies like Sharechat and Telegram, India's online, social media, and AI space is largely dominated by American giants such as Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Google, YouTube, X, ChatGPT, and Adobe.
Social media executives argue that such a short window is not technically feasible. Legal experts, such as Rahil Chatterjee, Principal Associate at Delhi-based Ikigai Law, support this assessment. He stated, "The amendments compress takedown timelines from 36 hours to just three hours, applying across all content categories. In reality, there is often no clear or immediate test for illegality, and even law-enforcement communications do not always spell this out unambiguously. Requiring platforms to take definitive action within such a short window will be extremely difficult to operationalise and creates a real risk of over-censorship."
Government Justification and US Concerns
A government official defended the compressed timelines, citing feedback from stakeholders that previous timelines were too long and did not prevent content's virality. "Tech firms certainly have the technical means to remove unlawful content much more quickly than before," the official said.
However, the US has a history of raising concerns over other countries' laws impacting American companies. Though many may not view local social media laws as non-tariff barriers, the current US administration has attacked other governments over such enforcement. For instance, last year, when the European Union fined X $140 million for violating social media laws, it sparked pushback from US officials. US Vice President JD Vance criticized the move, saying, "The EU should be supporting free speech, not attacking American companies over garbage." Similarly, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio called the fine an "attack on all American tech platforms and the American people by foreign governments."
Last year, a report by the US Trade Representative's office had raised concerns about India's non-tariff barriers, such as domestic security testing requirements for broadband gears, citing additional compliance costs. India had removed that requirement at the time, but the new social media rules could reignite similar tensions.
New AI Regulations and Implementation
Aside from strict takedown timelines, India also notified new rules governing AI-generated content. Under the amendments, the government has removed an earlier proposal to apply a label covering at least 10% of the space for AI-generated content, instead requiring "prominently" visible labels. This change was made after tech companies flagged during consultations that the 10% requirement would make content unappealing by taking away space.
The definition of synthetically generated information now includes carveouts for assistive and quality-enhancing uses of AI, with routine and good faith editing excluded. Intermediaries must take "appropriate" and "expeditious" action when aware of SGI use, including disabling access or removing information. Big tech companies must also ensure users declare SGI, deploy technical measures to verify accuracy, and display clear labels.
These changes will come into effect on February 20, coinciding with the final day of the upcoming India-AI Impact Summit. As the deadline approaches, tech firms are bracing for increased operational challenges, while the Indian government emphasizes the need for quicker content moderation to combat misinformation and unlawful material.
