The Delhi High Court begins hearing Chaitanya Rohilla's petition challenging Whatsapp's updated privacy policy.

Court asks the petitioner: What is your grievance? It's a private app, don't join it.
Court: What is the data you feel is going to be compromised?

Petitioner: Whatsapp shares information globally. Everything they gather from us is shared.
Court: Mr. Lal, there are two issues. One is that your personal messages are looked into and shared. Two is that your browsing history is shared.

Petitioner: They analyze browsing history and form an opinion about the user and share that.

Court: All apps do that.
Petitioner: In Europe and the US, Whatsapp gives an option to accept or reject the updated policy. But here in India, no such option is given.

Court: You have an option, don't use the app.
ASG Chetan Sharma appearing for the I & B Ministry says this issue needs analysing.

Sr. Adv. Mukul Rohatgi: I am appearing for Whatsapp.

Sr. Adv. Sibal: I am appearing for Whatsapp, you're appearing for Facebook.
Rohatgi: Either way, I am submitting that the app is completely safe to use. Let the petitioner be reassured that all chats between friends, relatives, etc will be encrypted and safe.
Sibal: Users have the option to engage with the business app or not.
Sibal submits for Whatsapp: This petition itself is not maintainable.

Court: List the case for 25th.
Counsel for Petitioner persists.

Court: I doubt that you have read any of the policies of any of the apps, you'll be shocked as to what all you consent to, and it is all voluntary, if you don't want, don't use the app. I am yet to understand your concern.

More from Live Law

You May Also Like

"I really want to break into Product Management"

make products.

"If only someone would tell me how I can get a startup to notice me."

Make Products.

"I guess it's impossible and I'll never break into the industry."

MAKE PRODUCTS.

Courtesy of @edbrisson's wonderful thread on breaking into comics –
https://t.co/TgNblNSCBj – here is why the same applies to Product Management, too.


There is no better way of learning the craft of product, or proving your potential to employers, than just doing it.

You do not need anybody's permission. We don't have diplomas, nor doctorates. We can barely agree on a single standard of what a Product Manager is supposed to do.

But – there is at least one blindingly obvious industry consensus – a Product Manager makes Products.

And they don't need to be kept at the exact right temperature, given endless resource, or carefully protected in order to do this.

They find their own way.
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.


The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.

This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.

The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."

This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.