Information Technology Law Syllabus

1. Information Technology Law Syllabus,
developed by Dr Irene Kafeza, NALSAR,
2013
Information
Technology
Law
IT Law, Syllabus, 2013
Dr Irene Kafeza

2. 1
Dr. Irene Kafeza
InformationTechnology Law –Syllabus(2013) i
Lecture1: Electronic contracts
The unprecedentedadvancementof the internetandelectroniccommunications have
introducednewwaysinbusinesstransactionswhereonline contractingiscomplementing
and evensubstitutingtraditional paper-basedtransactions.Whiletraditional contractlawis
baseduponcertainlongestablishedprinciples,the adoptionof these principlestomodern
contractingscenariosseem inadequate.This introductorylecture will considerthe
fundamental debateswhetherthere shouldbe anon- law internetoran internetas- a-
translationof traditional law, will presentthe IndianGovernment approachinregulating
the Internettransactionandthe basic schemes of National E-Governace Plan(NeGP) .
Additionallywill presentthe basicconceptson electroniccontractslaw inIndia ,will
presentanoverviewof the InformationTechnologyAct and discuss whetherthe current
frameworkaddressproperlythe underlyingissues.
Objectives
 To present the frameworkof cyberspace construction asa separate construction
 To presentthe basicschemes of National E-GovernancePlan(NeGP)
 to familiarize studentswith the basicconceptsof electroniccontracts
 To describe the peculiarities of contractsin electronicenvironmentincontrastwith
traditional contractlawprinciples
 To provide anoverviewof the InformationTechnologyAct
Readings:
 JamesBoyle,“FoucaultinCyberspace:Surveillance,SovereigntyandHardWiredCensors”,
66 Universityof Cincinnati Law Review,1997
 JustinHughes,“The Internetandthe Persistence of Law”, 44 B.C.L.Rev.359,2003
 MonideepaTarafdarand SanjivD.Vaidya,“Challengesinthe adoptionof E-Commerce
technologiesinIndia:The role of organizational factors”, 26 International Journal of
InformationManagement,2006
 SameerSachdeva,“e-Governance ActionPlanforIndia”,2002,
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/apcity/unpan014671.pdf
 National E-Governance Plan,http://india.gov.in/govt/national_egov_plan.php
Lecture 2: Internet Contracting: the validity ofemail contracts

3. 2
Electroniccommerce transactionsappearedfortyyearsagothroughthe use of electronic
fundstransfer( EFT) and the adoptionof ElectronicDataInterchange (EDI).ElectronicData
Interchange (EDI) has beendefined ascomputertocomputerinterchange of strictly
formattedmessagesbetweenparties. The EDI isclose systemsince it isemployedusually
by large companiesoveraprivate network. Althoughmostof the heavyelectronic
commerce beganoverthese private channels(EDI) andwhile contractsare still concluded
by privatelymaintainedelectronicdatainterchange (EDI) channels,recently new and
emergingelectronictransactionsare comingtorelyon opensystemssuch as the Internet.
Thisclass coversan overview of the existingcontracting meansandthe shiftfromclosed
systemstoopensystemssuchas the internet. Additionally,itwilldiscuss the waysof
concludingcontractsthroughinternetsuchasthrough email andspecificallywhetherthe
email contractssatisfythe legal requirementsforavalidcontract andmore particularlythe
classwill deal withthe issue whetherthe emailcontractsthatcontainoral modification
clausesare enforceable.
Objectives:
 To presentthe conceptsof closedandopensystems
 To presentthe ElectronicDataInterchange methodof contracting
 To analyze the conceptof the contractsconcludedthroughemail
 To discussthe validityof email contracts
 To explainthe enforceability of oral and non-oral modificationclauses includedinemail
contracts
Case Study: Stevensv.Publicis
Readings
 Donnie L.Kiddand WilliamH.Daughtrey,“AdaptingContractLaw to Accommodate
ElectronicContracts:Overview andSuggestions”,26 RutgersComputerandTech.
L.J.,2000
 Stevensv.Publicis,S.A.,50A.D.3d 253 (N.Y.Sup.Ct. 2008) (No.602716/03)
 Stephanie Holmes, Stevensv.Publicis:the rise of “noemail modification”clauses?,
6 Wash.J.L. Tech.and Arts,2010
 RobertA. Hillman andJeffrey J.Rachlinski,“Standard formcontractinginthe
electronicage”,77 N.Y.U.L.Rev.,2002
 Michael Froomkin. “Article 2Bas Legal Software forElectronicContracting -
OperatingSystemorTrojanHorse?”,13 BerkeleyTech.L.J.,1998
 RaymondT. Nimmer,PatriciaKrauthouse, “ElectronicCommerce”new paradigms
ininformationlaw”,31 IdahoL. Rev.937, 1995
 JulietM.Moringiello,«Signals,AssentandInternetContracting”,57 RutgersL. Rev.,
2005

4. 3
Lecture 3: The classificationof internetcontracts
This introductory classcoversthe Thisclass will discussthe classificationof internet
contracts and present the concepts of shrinkwrap,clickwrapand browse wrapcontracts.
Internetcontractinginmanyaspectsissimilartotraditional contractingandparticularly
withthe standardform contractingdespite the differentterminologyused. Courts in
decidingthese caseshasdiscussedissueslikewhethernew rulesare neededforthese
contracts. The debate regardinginternetcontractsinvolvesargumentssuchasthat the
adoptionof newregulationsforthese kindof contracts might give rise toa new classof
plaintiffsandnewcausesof actionincourts therebyincreasingthe numberof caseson
alreadyovercrowdedcourts.
One of the main challengesthese contracts haspresentedisthe debate whetherthe
copyrightclausesincludedinthese contractsrestrictingthe rightsof copyrightowners,are
validandwhethercontract law pre-emptscopyrightlaw orvice versa.There wasan
expressionof consideration thatif internetcontractsincludingthesetypes of restrictive
clauseswere enforceable, thenthe copyrightindustrywill be able tomassdistribute its
copyrightedworksinshrinkwrapsorclickwraps contracts requiringuserstoquitall or a
part of theirrights undercopyrightlaws.Insucha scenario the resultwill be aprivatization
and indirecteliminationof copyrightlaw.
This classcovers the concepts of internetcontracts,how they emergedand their
classification.More specifically,itanalyzesthe shrink wrap, the clickwrapand the browse
wrap contracts. Additionally,referstothe interrelationbetweencontractandcopyright
law.It will address the specificissuesunderthe IndianCopyrightAct.
Case study:ProCD,Inc. V.Zeidenberg, HotmailCorp.V.Van$MoneyPie, Groff v.America
Online,Inc
Objectives:
 To presentthe notionof internetcontracts
 To describe the shrinkwrap,the clickwrapand browse wrapcontracts
 To analyze the debate regarding the pre-emptionof contractlaw on copyrightlaw
 To determine whetherwe candraft restrictive copyrightclausesininternetcontracts
Readings:
 ProCD,Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir.1996Readings
 Hotmail Corp.V. Van$Money Pie,1998 WL 388389, 1 (N.D.Cal.
 G r o ff v. AmericanOnline,Inc.,No97-0331, 1998 WL 307001 ( R.I.Super.Ct.May
27, 1998)

5. 4
 Estelle DerclayandMarcellaFavale,“the Relationshipbetweencopyrightand
contract law: copyrightandcontract law:regulatinguserscontracts: the state of
the art anda researchagenda”,18 J.Intell.Prop.L.,2010
 RobertA. Hillmanand JeffreyJ.Rachlinski,“Standardformcontractinginthe
electronicage”,77 N.Y.U.L.Rev.,2002
 RaymondNimmer,The relationbetween contractandintellectual propertylaw,13
BerkeleyTech.L.J.827, 1998
 Mark Lemley,“Intellectual propertyand Shrinkwraplicenses”,South.Cal.L.R.,
2012, pp1239-1294
 Michael J. Madison,“Legal-Ware:ContractandCopyrightinthe Digital Age”,
67Fordam. L. Rev., 1998
 CharlesR.McManis, “The PrivatizationorShrink-Wrappingof American Copyright
Law”, 87 Cal. L. Rev.173 ,1999,pp173-190
 Page Kaufman,“ The Enforceabilityof state “shrinkwrap”licensestatutesinlightof
Vaultcorp.v. QuaidSoftware ,Ltd. “, 74 Cornell.L.Rev.,1988
Lecture 4 : The notionof assent in internetcontracts
The US Courts have discussed the clickwrapcontractsfirstlyin 1998 and they foundthem
validandenforceable. InIndia,currently,there are notrelevantCourtdecisions. Courts
have usedtraditional contractdoctrinestodeterminethe enforceabilityof clickwrap
contracts withoutdiscussingindetail the clickwrappeculiarities. The maintestto
determine whetherthe clickwrap contracts are validis whetherthe clickoccurred, andif
so,theypresume thatthe user assentedtothe termsof the agreements. So,Courtsin
determiningthe validityof clickwraplicensesfirstlyexaminesthe assentof the use whichis
consideredthatisgivenif the userclickedthe consent buttonorproceededinamanner
that wouldhave beenimpossible butforclickingonthe acceptance button.Afterdeciding
whetherassentexists,the courtexaminesthe objectionsbasedonthe failure toread,or
understandthe contractand afterthat it will looktoargumentsthatthe termis
unconscionable orinviolationof publicpolicy.Thisclassaddresses the issuesof assentin
internetcontracts,the peculiaritiesdeterming the assentof the partiesinthiscontextandt
relevantUScasesthat have discussedthese issues.
Objectives:
 To presentthe peculiaritiesof the notionof assentininternetcontracts
 To describe the stepsthatCourtstake in orderto determine the assentof parties
 To examine whetherthe clickingof the “Iagree” buttonqualifiesasavalidassent
 To discussthe relevantUScasesthat addressthese issues

6. 5
Case study:RecursionSoftware,Inc.v.Interactive Intelligence,Inc,Spechtv.Netscape
CommunicationsCorp.,SoftManProductsCo.v. Adobe SystemsInc.,Martinv. Snapple
Beverage Corp
Readings
 DavisJ. Nathan,Presumedassent:The Judicial acceptance of Click-wrap,22
BerkeleyTech.L.J.577, 2007
 TaskerTy, PakcykDaryn, Cyber–surfingonthe highseasof legalese:law and
technologyon internetagreements,18Alb.L.J. Sci.and Tech.79, 2008
 JulietM.Moringiello,«Signals,AssentandInternetContracting”,57 RutgersL. Rev.,
2005
 FrancisJ. Moots, Afterthe battle of the forms: commercial contractinginthe
electronicage,4 ISJLP271, 2008
 AmeliaRawls,Contractformationin the internetage,10 Colum.Sci.&Tech.L. Rev.
200, 2009
 Anjanette H.Raymond,Manner,method,receiptordispatch: the use of electronic
mediaisnothingnew tothe law,52 Loy. L. Rev.1, 2006
Lecture 4 : Internetcontracting : termsof use , warranties and limitationsof liabilities
Internetcontracts include clausesthatpresent limitationsof liabilitiesonwarranties.
These warrantieswhich are presentedascontract clausesstate thatthe e.g.the software is
provided“asis”and theydisclaimall warrantiesandrepresentationsincludingthe implied
warrantiesof merchantabilityandfitnessforaparticularpurpose.Moreover,the
warrantiesclausesusuallystate thatthe sellerisnotliable foranykindof damagesevenif
there isa like hoodof such damagesto occur. Thisclass will presentthe conceptof
warranties andlimitationsof liabilitiesininternetcontractsandwhatare the peculiarities
that have beenaddressedinthese clauses.
Case study:specificwarrantiesfromApple,Microsoftsites
Objectives:
 to presentthe issuesrelatedtowarrantiesanddisclaimersininternetcontracts
 To analyze whetherthe assentof partiesincludes assenttodisclaimersof warranty
 To examine andcompare specificexamplesof warranties from internet sites
 To discuss the existinglimitedwarrantylanguage usedand how these clausescouldbe
drafted
Readings
 RichardWarner, “Turnedon ItsHead?: Norms,Freedom, andAcceptableTermsin
InternetContracting”,11 Tul.J. Tech.andIntell.Prop.,2008

7. 6
 RobertA. Hillman andIbrahimBarakat,“ WarrantiesandDisclaimersinthe
electronicage”,11 Yale J. L. and Tech.,2008-2009
Lecture 5: Validityof electroniccontracts under InformationTechnologyAct
The thresholdquestionthatneedstobe answeredwhendecidingthe validityof an
electroniccontractiswhetherthiscontractcan be concludedinelectronicform.That
involvesthe procedureof determiningwhetherthere isspecificlaw inIndianlegislature
that authorizesthiscontractto be done in electronicform.Indianlaw eliminatesthe legal
barriersof concludingcontractselectronicallyandverifiesthe validityof contractsformed
throughelectronicmeans. The InformationTechnology Actauthorizesthe applicationof
electronicmethodsintransactions andcoversmostof the commercial transactions.
Nevertheless,there are anumberof transactionsthatare not authorizedtobe inelectronic
formsunderIndianLaw.This classcoversthe sectionsof InformationTechnologyActthat
validatesthe electroniccontracts.Itdiscussthe relevantwordinginthe preamble of the
InformationTechnology Actas well as discussthe exemptionsof section1(4) andthe first
Schedule.Additionally,itwill discussection10A of InformationTechnologyActandthe
conceptof functional equivalence approach.
Objectives :
 To presentthe sectionsof InformationTechnologyActthatvalidate the electronic
contracts
 To presentthe exemptionsof section1(4) andfirstschedule
 To discuswhetherthe exemptionsconstitute anobstacle inthe adoptionof electronic
contracts
 To presentsection10A of InformationTechnology Act
 To discussthe functional equivalenceapproachunderthe InformationTechnologyAct
Lecture 6: Electronic offerand electronicacceptance under“informationTechnologyAct –
part I
The electroniccontracts legislationregulates the requirements ,withwhich the electronic
transactionneedstocomplywith,inorderto ensure the functional equivalence withthe
requirementsposedbythe traditionallaw.Alsothe legislationposesadditional
requirementsthatneedtobe implemented for electroniccontractstransactionsuchas to
clarifythe conceptof originatorof electronicrecord. Therefore,foran electroniccontract
to be validbesidesgeneral requirements, specificrequirements posedylegislationshould
be there. Moreoverthese specificelectroniccontractinglawsshouldbe applicablewith
relationtootheradditional enactedlegislationsuchas inEvidence Act.Thisclasspresents
the whetherthe notionsof electronicoffer andacceptance are addressed inthe

8. 7
InformationTechnologyActandto whatextent.Additionally,examinesthe notionof
electronicrecordsunderInformationTechnology andEvidenceAct.
Objectives:
 To clarifywhatconstituteselectronicofferandacceptance
 To presentthe conceptof electronicrecordunderInformationTechnologyAct and
Evidence Act
 To analyze the notionof attributionof electronicrecordsundersection11of IT Act
Readings:
 Valerie Watnick, The ElectronicFormationof Contractsandthe CommonLaw
"Mailbox Rule",56
 BaylorL. Rev.175, 191-92, 2004
 Winn K. Jane, Bix H. Brian, Diverging perspectives on electronic contracting in the
US and EU , 54 Clev. St.L.Rev,175,2006
 Kierkegaard Mercado Sylvia, E_Contract formation: US and EU Perspective, 3
ShidlerJ.L.Com.andTech. 12, 2007
 Christopher T. Poggi, “ Electronic Commerce legislation, An Analysis of European
and AmericanApproachestoContractFormation”,41 Va. J.Int'l L.,2000
Lecture 7 & 8 : Electronic offerand electronicacceptance under “informationTechnology
Act –part II
Thisclass covers the notionof acknowledgementof receiptand the basicconcepts of
formation of electroniccontractsinrelationtotime of dispatchandreceiptof electronic
records.It discusthe notionof instantaneouscommunications anditsdifferencewith
physical communications fromlegal perspective.Itanalyzesthe conceptof dispatchas
presented inthe InformationTechnologyActandthe notionof receiptof electronicrecord.
Additionally,itcritically discusswhetherthere isaneedfora re-assessmentand
redistributionof risksrelatedtothe receiptrules, towhatextendthe notionof “meetingof
minds”isrequiredinthose transactions andwhatconstitutesvalidacknowledgmentof
receiptunderthe Act.Moreover,discusthe notionsof place of dispatchaspresentedinthe
Information TechnologyAct.
Objectives:
 To presentwhat constitute receiptandacknowledgmentof receiptunderInformation
TechnologyAct

9. 8
 To describe the peculiaritiesof instantaneouscommunications
 To explainwhatconstitutesdesignatedcomputerresource
 To analyze the conceptof time of dispatchandreceiptof electronicrecordunderthe
InformationTechnologyAct
 To analyze the conceptof place of dispatchand receiptof electronicrecordunderthe
InformationTechnologyAct
 To criticallydiscusthe needforredistributionof risksassociatedwiththe receiptrule in
electroniccommunications

Readings:
 Raymond,H. Anjanette,Manner,Method,ReceiptorDipatch:The use of electronic
mediaisnothingnew tothe law,52 Loy.L. Rev.1,2006
 ZarembaJochen, InternationalelectronictransactionscontractsbetweenU.Sand
EU companiesandcustomers,18 Conn.J. Int'l L. 479, 2003
Lecture 9 : electroniccontracts and e-markets
The e marketplace representsan increasingportion of the business community since both
individualsandcompaniessell andpurchase overthe internet.The growthof markets
affectsnearlyall sectorsof the economyandhas transformedthe picture of all markets.
The lecture electronicmarkets isconcernedwithpresenting,analyzing,andintroducing
electronicmarketplatforms(asanenvironmentforB2Bcontracting). Thisclasswill
familiarizestudents withexistinge-marketsconceptsand provide examples of specific
electronicplatformssuchasthe e-choupal platformthatenabled Indianfarmersto
establishadirect marketingchannel uponwhichtheycansell their products, enabledthem
to eliminatethe intermediaries andlowerthe transactionscosts,toallow farmerstodirect
negotiate virtuallywith purchasers andtowhatextendthis platformhasincreasedthe
level of theirrural economy. Moreover thisclasswill examine the purchasingandsellingof
productsand services inAlibabaas well asthe Ocenatomoplatformwhere patentowners
sell their patents.
Case studies:e-Choupal,Alibaba,com, OceanTomo
Objectives:
 Studentslearntocomprehendandtoevaluate the potentialsof electronicmarket
platforms
 To present the characteristicsof e-marketsandhow their functionsare differentfrom
traditional market
 To discussspecificelectronicplatformswheregoodsandservicesare purchasedandsold
 To examine the terms andconditionspresentedinthese platformsitesandcritically
evaluate them

10. 9
Readings
 Papazoglou,M.P.andPieterRibbers(2006):e-Business:Organizational and
Technical Foundations.publishersJ.Wiley&Sons,Chapter8
 E-choupal,e-empoweringthe Indianfarmers,
http://www.itcportal.com/sustainability/lets-put-india-first/echoupal.asp
 http”//www.E-choupal.com
 SiriginidiSubbaRao,“Achievingmillenniumdevelopmentgoals:Roleof ICTS
innovationsinIndia”,26TelematicsandInformatics,2009
Lecture 10: E-auctions& mobile e-auctions
Electronic auctions present an increasing trend of ecommerce. There are several models
upon which operate such as the “name your own price” model. Some sites offering electronic
auctions give the opportunity to participants to negotiate the prices. The recent trend is the
mobile auctions .Most Online auction sites disclaim the responsibility for fraud committed in
their sites. This class presents the legal issues associated with electronic auctions .
Additionally, covers the issue whether the disclaimers on auction sites are valid and
enforceable.
Case study:The case of e-bay
Objectives
 To presentthe varioustypesof e-auctionsandlisttheircharacteristics
 To presentthe pricingmodelsof e-auctions
 To explainthe negotiationprocessinauctionsites
 To analyze the instancesof fraudinauctionsitesandtheirprevention
 Analyze mobileauctions
 To discussthe validityof termspresentedin auctionsites
Readings:
 EfraimTurban, DavidKing,JudyMcKay,PeterMarshall,Jae Lee and Dennis
Viehland,ElectronicCommerce 2010: A Managerial Perspective,Pearson
Education,2010. (bookchapter)
 AzeemAleem,AlbertAntwi-Boasiako,Internetauctionfraud:The evolvingnature
of online auctionscriminalityand the mitigatingframeworktoaddressthe threat,
International Journal of Law,Crime andJustice,Volume 39,Issue 3,September
2011
Lecture 11: how to draft terms and conditionsfor internetsites-partI

11. 10
Thisclass providesstudentswiththe opportunitytolearndraftingtermsandconditions –
clickwrap agreements-fortheirfuture clients.The introductorystepwill be topresentto
themwithclickwrap agreements inwhichtheywillhave toidentify whichclause are
valid depending knowledgeacquiredonpreviouslectures.The secondstepistosearch on
the internet andpresentandexplaintoclassthe contentsof these agreements
Objectives
 To familiarizethe students withsearchingand readingthe clickerapagreements
 To enable themtodistinguishthe validclausesof clickwrapagreements
Lecture 12 & 13 : how to draft terms and conditionsfor internetsites -part II
Thisclass will operate asasimulationof law firm. The classcollectivelywill draftthe terms
and conditionsforahypothetical clientandcriticallydiscusswhatclauseswouldbe inplace
inorder to betterdraftthe clickwrap contract.. We will workonadditional draftingissues
that will presentedinclass thatwill furtherdevelopstudents draftingskills.
.
Objective :
 To familiarizestudents with law practice byenhancingtheirdrafting skillsand
critical thinking
Lecture 14: ElectronicSignatures
Thisclass exploreshowelectronicsignaturespoliciesaffectthe applicationof contractlaw
inthe currentelectroniccommerce marketplace.Itseemsthatthe knowingof the
conceptsof writingandsigninginthe traditional law isnotenoughanymore for a lawyer.
In thisclass,studentswill considerthe basicsof writingandsignature requirementsand
howthese requirementsapplytothe currentelectronicenvironment. Thisclassdiscuss the
digital andelectronicsignaturerequirementsunderInformationTechnologyActand
InformationTechnologyRules.
Objectives:
 to familiarizethe studentswiththe requirementsandconceptsof electronicsignatures
 To presentthe conceptof the legal recognitionof e-signatures,and of secure elecotrnic
signatures
 To explainthe notionof authendicationanditsrelationtotrust
 To explainthe difference betweenelectornicanddigital signature
 To presentthe conceptof publickeyinfrastracture

12. 11
Readings:
 ThomasJ Smedinghoff andRuthHill Bro,“MovingwithChange:ElectronicSignature
Legislationasavehicle foradvancingE-Commerce”17 Marshall J. of Comp.and
Info.Law,723, 1999
 WinnJane,“The emperor’snew clothes:the shockingtruthaboutdigital signatures
and internetcommerce”,37 Idaho L. Rev.353, 2001
 KalamaM. Lui-Kwan,Businesslaw:electronicCommerce:a) digital signatures:
recentdevelopmentsindigital signature legislationandelectroniccommerce,14
BerkeleyTech.L.J.463, 1999
Lecture 15 : CertifyingAuthorities
Thisclass discussthe CertifyingAuthoritiesregulationunderthe InformationTechnology
Act. IT will presentthe conceptof RootCertifyingAuthorityof India,the proceduresfor
obtaininglicense andestablishmentof a CertifyingAuthority, whatconstitutesdigital
signature certificate andthe classesof certificates,the digital signature certificate standard
X.509, interoperabilityissues.Additionallyitwillpresentliabilityissuedof Certifying
Authorities,instancesof CertifyingAuthorityfailureLiabilityissuesunderlaw of tort,Strict
liability,Whocansue the CertifyingAuthority,Liabilityissuesundercontractlaw andtort
law,warrantiesandExemptionClauses,liabilityof breachof warranty,liabilityunder
intellectual propertylaw.
Case study: The VeriSign/Microsoftincident,TataConsultancyServicesLimitedCertifying
Authority, CertificationPractice Statement
Objectives:
 to preset frameworkof CertifyingAuthoritiesunderInformation Technology Actand I.T.
(CertifyingAuthority) Regulations
 to understand the role of CertifyingAuthoritiesin electronictransactions
 to introduce the conceptandimportance of interoperabilitybetweenthe different
certificates
 to criticallyanalyze the role of CertifyingAuthoritiesasa mediumforboostingorhalting
electroniccommerce
Readings:
 Dr. Gupta & Agrawal,InformationTechnology Law andpractice,2d. ed.2012
 M.Osty,M. Pulcanio,“The liabilityof CA torelyingthirdparties”, 17J. Marshall J.
Comp.and InfoL.961
 Michael Froomkin,“Symposium:innovationandthe informationenvironment:
The Essential Role of TrustedThirdPartiesinElectronicCommerce”,75 Or. L.Rev.49,
1996

13. 12
 InteroperabilityguidelinesforDigital SignaturesCertificatesissuedunder
InformationTechnologyAct,Version2.0,2009 ,
http://cca.gov.in/rw/pages/index.en.do
 ThomasJ. Smedinghoff,“CertificationAuthorityliabilityanalysis”,American
BankersAssociation,1998,http://64.78.35.30/article/ca-liability-analysis.pdf
 Tata ConsultancyServicesLimitedCertifyingAuthority, CertificationPractice
Statement,TCS-CA TrustNetworkversion1.3,2011http://www.tcs-
ca.tcs.co.in/pdf/TCS-CA_Trust_Network_CPS-V_1.3.pdf
16: Internetservice providers
Thisclass will discusthe regulationof Internetservice providersunderthe Information
TechnologyAct
Lecture 17 : Machine to machine transactions under InformationTechnology Act
Withthe newtechnologies,thingshave changedandprogrammedmachines
communicatingelectronicallyare makingthe contractswhile the partiesare notinvolvedin
the transactions.Electroniccommunicationsystemsdon’tdecideoract or thinkby their
ownbut theymay act on theirown.Thisfact createsa differentenvironmentforelectronic
contracting.The decisive factorthat reflectsthisfactisthe extenttowhichpersonsare or
are notinvolvedinthe transactions.This classwill discuss the conceptof machine to
machine ,intelligentagentscontractingunderThe IT Act.
Objectives:
 To presentthe conceptof machine to achine contracting
 To presentintelligentagentsoperation
 To discussthe gap intraditional legislationregardingthe adoptionof legal personality to
intelligentagents
 To discusshowintelligentagentsmeetthe requirementof “meetingof the minds”inorder
to enterintoelectroniccontracts
 To discussthe issuesof errorswhensystementerintocontracts
 To introduce the conceptof mobile agents
Readings
 AllenT,.WiddisonR.,Can Computersmake Contracts?,HarvardJournal of Law,
1996

14. 13
 Margaret Jadin,“ Humans,ComputersandBindingcommitment”,75 Ind.L. J. ,
2000
 DavidD. Wong, “The EmergingLaw of ElectronicAgents:e-Commerce andBeyond”,
33 SuffolkU.L. Rev.,1999,
 Jean-FrancoisLerouge,“the use of electronicagentsquestionedundercontractual
law:suggestedsolutionsonEuropeanandAmericanlevel”, 18J. Marshall J.
ComputerandInfo.L., 1999
 Daniel Le Métayer,Shara Monteleone,Automatedconsentthroughprivacyagents:
Legal requirementsandtechnical architecture,ComputerLaw & SecurityReview,
Volume 25, Issue 2, 2009
 KeesStuurmanandhugoWijnands,“IntelligentAgents:a curse or a blessing?A
surveyof the legal aspectsof the applicationof intelligentsoftware systems”,17
ComputerLaw andSecurityreport,2001
 Emad Abdel RahimDahiyat, “IntelligentAgentsandcontracts:Isa conceptual
rethinkimperative?“,Artif.Intell.Law.,2007
 GiusellaFinnocchiaro,“Electroniccontractsandsoftware agents”, 19 Computer
Law and SecurityReport2003
 R EmilyWeitzenborck,“ GoodFaithand fairdealingincontractsformedand
performedbyelectronicagents”,12 Artificial Intelligence andLaw, 2004
 Ian Kerr,“ Bots, Babesand Californicationof Commerce”,1Universityof Ottawa
law& technologyjournal,2003/2004
 Bellia,J.Anthony,Contractingwithelectronicagents,EmoryLaw Journal,2001
 Lerouge Jean-Francois,“UCITA:The use of electronicagentsquestioned under
contractual law:suggestedsolutionsonaEuropeanand Americanlevel,”18J.
Marshall J. ComputerandInfo.L.403, 1999
Lecture 18 : Software licenses
Software licensesare the license thataccompanythe software.These license usually
permitthe userto use one or more copiesof the software . The typical classificationof
software licenseis proprietaryandopensource license.Thisclass will discussthe issues of
howto license the software andexamine the Americal Law Institute (ALI) principlesof law
of software contracts.
Objectives:
 To introduce the conceptof licensingthe software
 To distinguishbetweenproprietaryandopensource software
 To presentthe ALI principlesof law of software

15. 14
Readings:
 JulietM.Moringiello*andWilliamL.Reynolds,What'sSoftware GotTo Do withIt?
The ALI Principlesof the Law of Software Contracts,84 Tul.L. Rev.1541, 2010
 FlorenciaMarottaWurgler,Will Increaseddisclosure help?Evaluaitngthe
Recommendationsof the ALI’sprinciplesof the Law of software contracts,78
U.Chi.L.Rev.165, 2011
Lecture 19 : Software licenses:opensource licenses –part I
OpenSource licensesare licensesthatare accompanythe software anddeclare itsfree use
and redistributionincontrast withthe proprietarysoftware.Theirmainfeature isthat
supportthe distributionof software forfree.This classdiscuss the basicconcepts,the
difference frompublicdomain,the opensource license asclickwrapcontracts,the
movementof opensource software andthe movementof free software aswell astheir
differences.
Objectives:
 To presentthe notionof open source software
 To distinguishthe free software frompublicdomainsoftware
 To distinguishthe free software movementfromthe opensource movements
 To describe the various typesof opensource licenses
 To understand the difference betweenopensource andproprietarylicenses
 To understandwhatisdual licensingof software
 To presentthe opensource software validityasa corporate asset
 To introduce specificissues suchaslinkingandlibrariesandthe associated legal issues
Readings
 RobertW. Gomulkiewicz,“Gettingseriousaboutuserfriendlymassmarket
licensingforsoftware”, 12 Geo. Mason.L. Rev.,2004, pp.687-718
 NagyD., YassinA. M., and Bhattacherjee A.,“Organizationaladoptionof open
source software:barriersan d remedies”,.53Communicationsof the ACM, no.
3,2010
 Gurbani,V.K.,Garvert,A.,andHerbsleb,J.D.,"Managinga Corporate OpenSource
Software Asset," 53Communicationsof the ACM,2010
 ReddyH.,“Jacobsenv. Katzer:The Federal CircuitWeighsisonthe Enforceabilityof
Freee andOpenSource Software Licesnes”,24 BerkelyTech.L.J.299,2010
 ArmstrongT.,”Shrinkingthe commons:terminationof copyrightlicense and
transfersforthe benefitof the public”,47 Harv. J.on Leg.359, 2010

16. 15
Lesson20: Opensource software : General PublicLicense
The main license of openource software andthe mosrtlyadoptedisthe General Public
License (GPL).Inthisclasswe will analyze article byarticle the provisionsof thislicense and
the differencesbetween itsthree versions.
Objective
 To analyze the General PublicLicense(GPL)
Readings:
 Mark LemeleyandZivShafir,Whochoosesopensource software?78U.Ch.L.Rev.,
139, 2011
 JosephA.Chen,Testingopensource waters:derivative worksunderGPL3,13 Chap.
L. Rev.1237, 2009
 George Finney,The evolutionof GPL3and contributoe agreementsinopensource
software,14 J. Tech.L. & Pol.79, 2009
 NicholasClark,J?urisprudenceforadigital age:free software andthe needfora
newmedialegal authority,14UDC-DCSL L. Rev.193, 2011
 DavidMcGowan, the licensingof intellectual property:the toryanarchismof F/OSS
licensing,78U. Ch. L. Rev207, 2011
Lesson20 & 21 : Drafting software licenses
Thisclass will enhance studentsdraftingcapabilitiesbydrafting the appropriate licenses
for the software onthe basisof hypothetical’spresentedtothem. We will examine,asa
lawfirm,the goalsand problemspresentedtostudent byahypothetical clientand
creativelydetermine the appropriate formof license .
Objective :
 contribute tostudentsunderstandingof software licenseslaw
 to make t he aware of ideasandissueswithwhichtheymightnothave hadfamiliarityor
consideredregardingthe draftingof relevantlicenses
 to enhance the legal reasoningandimprove the abilityto choose licensesandlicensing
problemseffectively
Lecture22 : Securityand privacy

17. 16
The developmentof electroniccommerce andinterneteconomywill ultimatelywill be
decidedonwhetherbusinesses,governmentsandindividualsare confidentthattheycan
relyon itand use it safelyforcritical applicationsandservices. Thisclasspresentstrendsin
the area of securityandprivacyandmaps theminthe widereconomicandsocial context.
It discussthe incidentsthatcompromise the securitysuchasdenial of service attacks(
DoS),phishing, malware thatthreatthe integrityandavailabilityof information.In
applicationwhere personal dataare collected,processedandstored,these compromises
have a substantial influence onusersprivacyanddata protection.Thisclassdiscusswhat
are the available measuresthatIndianGovernmenthastakeninorderto face data treats.
Case study:reputation.com
Objectives:topresentthe securityandprivacyconceptsinelectronicenvironament
 Studentsunderstandthe importanceof security,
 To describe the majorconceptsandterminologyof security,
 To learnaboute-commerce security threatsandrisks,
 To describe the informationassurance securityprinciples,
 To presentthe relevance of informationsecurityandprivacy
 To increase the skillsof studentsinidentifyinganddeal withinformationsecurityand
privacythreats
Readings
 KevinAquilina,Publicsecurityversusprivacyintechnologylaw:A balancingact?,
ComputerLaw& SecurityReview, Volume 26,Issue 2,March 2010
 JenniferChandler,InformationSecurity,contractandliability,84Chi.-Kent.L.R.,
841, 2010
Lecture 23: privacy issues
Thislecture isorganizedinmannerwhichisintendedtogive studentsapractical viewof
the data protection issues.This classwilldel withthe readingof the “ PrivacyinAtlantis”
and itscomparisonwith Rightof InformationAct. Studentswill be separatedingroupsand
analyze the conceptsof the paper.
Objective:
 basicunderstandingof privacyconcerns
Readings
Kang,Jerryand Buchner,Benedikt, Privacy inAtlantis.HarvardJournal of Law and
Technology,Vol.18,No.1, Fall 2004

18. 17
Lecture 24 : Legal issuesinemergingtechnologies:Cloud computing
Thislecture providesinputonemergingtrendsandbenchmarkapplicationsof ICT
technologiesandservicesinordertoputstudentsintocontextandperspective of the
information technologylegal applications.Itaimstohighlightparticulartrendsthathave
alreadydevelopedandheavilyare employedbythe IndianITindustryanditis predicted
that have a substantial impactonfuture.
In particularCloudcomputinghasbeendefinedasasa service model forforcomuting
deviceswhichisbasedoncomputerresourcesthatare flexible,adona demandway.Cloud
computingcoversa wide range of services,ithas three service models:the Infrastructure
as service (IaaS) whicheliminatedthe needforservers,the Platformasa Service (PaaS)
witha middleware stack,andSoftware asService (SaaS) thatreplacesthe the traditional
needof installingsoftware withsubscriptions. The waycontractscan be createdand
managedina cloud computingenvironmentisof paramountimportance forplanningand
implementingclouds.A masteragreementisformedamongthe participatingpartiesfor
the sharingof the resources.Atruntime,the cloudproviderdynamicallydiscoversthe
appropriate resourcesthatcanexecute the jobandnegotiatesthe contractwiththem.
Privacyissues:the facilitationof cloudcomputingallowsdatastoredincloudanda huge
processingof them.Itisunderconsiderationthe channelsbywhichdataare processedin
the Cloud. More particularly,the relevantnew conceptof BigData and theiruse inCloud
computingraisesnovel legalissues.Bigdatahasbeendefinedashighvolumesof
informationthatare generatedbygeospatical applicationsusedbystate formappingand
for situational awarenessactivities.Teyare alsoused byorganizationsbycollectingand
analyzingrelativelysmall amountsof informationsuchassocial mediaconversations.
Objectives:
 T o presentthe conceptof cloudcomputing
 To analyze the legal issuesoncloud
 To presentthe issuesregardingthe validityof clausesonthe subscriberstothe cloudwhen
enterintoclickwrap agreementsinthe cloud
 To presentthe masteragreementincloudaswell discussthe liabilityof cloudproviders
 To discuss the privacyand data protectionissuesonthe cloud fromthe perspective of
Rightof InformationAct
 To specificallyaddressthe issuesof the use of BigData in cloudcomputingapplications
Readings:
 George Jiang,“ rain or shine:fairandothernoninfringesusesinthe contextof
cloudcomputing“,36 J. Legis.,2010
 TimothyJ,Calloway,Cloudcomputing,clickwrapagreementsandlimitationon
liability clauses:aperfectstorm?,164, Duke L.& Tech.R., Vol.11,

19. 18
 NaqeedAhmedKazia,Anoverviewof CloudComputinganditslegal implicationsin
India,Computer and Telecommunication L.Rev.,2012
Lecture 25 : Legal issuesinemergingtechnologies: Drafting Cloudcomputing contracts
Thisclass will explaintostudentshow todraftthe contracts inthe cloud environment.
Lecture 26 :Legal issuesonemergingtechnologies: Law and Robots
Th class offersstudentsthe opportunityto examine the currenttrendsinlaw relatingto
robots.
Lecture27: Legal issueson emergingtechnologies: social networkings sitesand
electroniccontracts
Thiwclasscovers the conceptof social media,example of majorsocial mediawebsites,
issuesraisedby Postinginappropriate oroffensive content,casesof defamation,
negligence,trademark,copyrightinsocial media,traditional law andadditional stepsfor
handlingsocial mediacases,privacyintweeter,evidence andsocial media,social media
and spam.
Objective:
 the objective of the course isto give anoverview of the legal issuesthatarise whenusing
social media
 the contractingissuesthathas arisenbythe use of social media
Readings:
 Mark AllenChen,Interactivecontractinginsocial networks,97Cornell L.Rev.1533,
2012
 Aaron Chiu,irrationallybound:termsof use licensesandthe breakdownof
consumerrationallityinthe marketforsocial networksites,21Cal.Interdis.L.J.
167, 2011
Lecture 28 : Legal issueson emergingtechnologies:Mobile commerce
The rapid technological developmentshaschangedthe landscape of marketsandentire
sectorshas shiftedordeveloped due tothe adoptionof new applicationsandservices.
These applications andservicesare supportedbythe underlyingphysical infrastructure.
The physical infrastructure isacombinationof software andhardware.Devicessuchas
mobile phonesprovide the platformsuponwhichthe softwareprovidesinteraction
betweendevicesandcontent. Thisclasswillexamine the mostinfluential developments
inhardware devicesandoperatingsystemsaswell assoftware thatsupportthe internet
economyandthe associatedlegal issuesraised bytheiruse.
Case study : Amazon’sKindle Fire browser.

20. 19
Objectives:
 To understand howthe expansionof mobile internetconnectivityhasbenefitedthe IT
sectorand an inside whyinternetfirmshave performedthe best due tothisexpansion
 studentstobe able to understand emergingtechnologies relatedtoservicesanddevices
and the associatedlegal issues
Lecture 29 : mobile commerce and operatingsystems
In the mobile sectorthere wasashiftfor internetconnecteddevices. The new platforms
have changedthe traditional wayinwhichsoftware ispurchasedandsold.The traditional
printedlincess thataccompany the software hasshiftedandappstoresusuallyuse other
wayssuch as the licensesare inthe store app account. The storage of the licensesonthe
app store account are easy tobe locatedand presentedto the user.Apps alsocan be stored
ot removedeasilyonanydevice.Thereis alsoanincreasedsecurity scheme since the
companythat operatesthe platformshasreviewedthe apps andas a result less
possibilitiesformalware are reduced.
Case study:
Android,anopensource software formobile devices hasbeenestablishedas the dominant
platform. Apples’ iOsoperatingsystemmhasalsogain a bigportionof the market.
Objectives:
 To describe the mobile computingenvironment
 describe m-commerce applications,(describe mobileoperatingsystemsandtheirbusiness
model,discussopensource vsproprietarysolutions,the casesof androidandiOSapple)
 to understandthe technologiesandpotential applicationof locationbasedcommerce,
 to expainwhatlegal issuesare raisedbythe use of these mobile applications
Readings:
 EfraimTurban, DavidKing,JudyMcKay,PeterMarshall,Jae Lee and Dennis
Viehland,ElectronicCommerce 2010: A Managerial Perspective,Pearson
Education,2010. (bookchapter)
 http://www.webopedia.com/DidYouKnow/Hardware_Software/mobile-operating-
systems-mobile-os-explained.html
Lecture 30 : Mobile commerce and the Internetof things
Presently,societiesare increasingadoptingdevicesthatcommunicate andprocessusers
data. These devicesoftencollectinformationwithoutthe userconsentorknowledge.That

21. 20
has as a resultconcernsto be raisedregardingthe dataprotectionand privacy of the users.
In the currentstage of internet expansionobjects are continually connectedtothe internet
as a methodforincreasingtheirfunctionality.Inthis classwe discussthe factorsthat
enable the internetof things:the pervasiveness of network andthe lowerpricesfor
connectingdevicesandhow all these developmentsaffect andchallenge the existing
legislative system
Readings:
 NancyJ. King,Pernille WegenerJessen,Profilingthe mobilecustomer –Privacy
concernswhenbehavioural advertiserstargetmobile phones –Part I,Computer
Law & SecurityReview,Volume26,Issue 5, September2010, Pages455-478,
Lecture 31 : mobile commerce , ambientIntelligence (AmI) andaugmentedreality
Mobile devices suchasGPS or mobile cell towerscanlocate the locationof usersandtailor
the requiredservicesaccordingly. These locationbaseddevicesare connectedwiththe
tablets,GPSand smartphones andconsista commonfeature onmobile devices. The
locationbasedreccomnendations ( Yelp,Qype ) are used heavenly andthe mainfeatures
isto combine locationinformationwithspecificusertailoredservices. It seemed that
these locationdeviceswill grow since telecommunication operateshasexpressedtheir
interestforthese services.
Case Study: Location aware remindersapps forAndroid:RemindThat,LocationAlert,
Bythe Way GPS Reminder:legal issues
Objectives:
 To discusskeycharacteristics,critical technologiesandapplicationsof mobile
commerce and ambientintelligence
Readings:
 E. Kafeza,I.Kafeza,PrivacyissuesinAmIspaces,Int.J.of NetworkingandVirtual
Organizations,Vol.6,No.6,2009
Lecture 32 : Online Dispute Resolution(ODR )
Online disputeResolution( ODR) refersto the resolutionof civil disputesotherthantrial in
an electronicenvironment. Inorderlawyersmusthave acomprehensive knowledgeof
howto effectivelyprepare forODR,theymustbe able to understandthe formso f ODR
and itsprocess . These lecturesintenttofamiliarizestudentswiththe ODRconcept.The
lectureswill explainthe conceptof ODR.
Objectives:

22. 21
 familiarizestudentswiththe fundamentalconceptsof ODR
 how to advocate effectivelyforclientsinODRprocesses.
Lecture : Create your online law firm on the net
This isa practical lecture thataimsto provide the technical backgroundandrelevant
informationforanewlawyerthatwantsto start his/herlaw office andwantto have an
internetpresence.Thisclasswill provide the reasoningbehindcreatingnetlaw firm, the
methodsof communicatingwithcustomersandthe toolsforthis. More particularly,itwill
presentWeebly:howtouse web2.0toolsto create your ownwebsite andblog,how to
insertGoogle analyticstowatchyour sitesperformance and tipsforbecomingknown
whenyoustart yourlaw office.
Objective
 Studentsafterclasswill know the toolsandmethodstocreate theirownfirmonthe
internet
Readings:
 http://www.weebly.com/,http://www.google.com/analytics/,
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/50_ways_to_market_your_practice
i Dr Irene Kafeza, NALSAR, ITLaw Syllabus