After telecom major Vodafone slapped a legal notice on one of its customers, Dhaval Valia, for ?making an attempt to defame the name and spoil the goodwill? of the company by sending ?unnecessary, unneeded and unwarranted ? text messages to its senior officials, the larger picture shifts to the regulations governing the online space, particularly social media sites, which are often used by people as a medium to express discontentment over daily issues.
Were the aggrieved customer?s Facebook posts ? which Vodafone claims to be ?malicious? and intended at garnering collective outrage against it? enough evidence to file a defamation suit against him? Cyber security expert Rakshit Tandon says: ?If the customer had even just insulted the company, they?re right to go ahead with the case as per the IT Act. Whether the remarks were slanderous or malicious will be decided by the court.?
What laws define freedom of expression on the internet? According to section 66(a) of the IT Act 2008, ?Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device, any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, or ill will, persistently makes by making use of such computer resource or a communication device, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.?
Vodafone alleges that the customer not only posted his own grievances on his profile (which was set to ?public? until the legal notice, thereby allowing any user access to his posts), but also put up names and numbers of senior employees, urging his friends to call them directly for any service-related issues, instead of going through the customer care route. ?Trai (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) has specific guidelines on customer care issues. The senior management is never approached directly,? said Vodafone.
Valia?s case in the consumer court, alleging ?infringement of privacy? by the company, for tracking conversations on his ?private? profile, stands to lose ground. The company added: ?His profile was made private after the notice reached him. Until then, his public profile allowed everybody unrestricted access to his wall posts and updates.? Tandon agrees: ?Facebook is a public domain. No information on it can be termed private. The consumer?s suit is unnecessary here.?
Will Vodafone?s lawsuit against a customer set off a trend of aggressive stands by companies, on remarks about them in the social media circuit, which is more ?free? and uninhibited than all other forms of media? Social media analyst, Moksh Juneja, feels: ?Vodafone has gone too ahead with this case. They could?ve addressed the issue individually with the unsatisfied customer.?
?If social media is monitored to the extent of gagging people, it loses its basic essence of direct communication by the mass,? he adds.
The case is pending in the court and Vodafone refused to comment on it.