India has warned technology companies that it is ready to impose a ban if they fail to take effective action against fake videos, following a warning from a well-known personality over a deepfake ad that used his image to endorse a gaming app.
This stern warning comes as New Delhi follows up on consultation last November on upcoming regulations to identify and restrict the spread of fake media. Rajeev Chandrasekhar, Deputy Minister of Information Technology, said that the ministry plans to amend the country’s IT rules by next week to put in place final laws that tackle deepfakes. He expressed dissatisfaction with technology companies’ adherence to previous government advice on manipulative content.
“If a platform thinks it can get away without removing fake videos, or just maintain a casual approach to them, we have the ability to protect our citizens by banning such platforms,” Chandrasekhar said at a press conference.
Chandrasekhar said the ministry had explicitly told tech platforms that failure to effectively combat deepfakes would result in legal consequences from New Delhi. He stated that Deepfake content is illegal and dangerous, and it is unacceptable for companies to hide behind claims of “doing their best” while allowing these fabrications to spread.
Deepfakes have made headlines in India once again, with national cricket icon Sachin Tendulkar taking to social media this week warning his countless fans that video ads that falsely misrepresented the use of his video to endorse an online gambling platform were fraudulent.
“It is alarming to see the widespread misuse of technology,” he wrote in a post. “Social media platforms must be alert and respond to complaints. Quick action on their part is critical to stopping the spread of misinformation and deepfake.
Panic is mounting over the potential spread of deepfakes ahead of India’s general elections, which are expected to begin from April. IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw said late last year that technology platforms recognize the danger of deepfake content and have agreed not to protect such media under freedom of expression defenses.