1.Big Tech Competition Regulation (Competition Law)
What & Where
Case: CCI fined Meta ₹213 cr, banned WhatsApp-to-Meta data sharing (India, 2024 order on 2021 policy).
Forum: NCLAT granted stay, directing 50 % deposit, pending detailed appellate review.
Issue: Data-centric dominance, network effects, privacy-competition overlap in Indian digital markets.
Quick Facts for MCQs
Legal & Policy
- SupremeCourt 2015: Section 79 gives safe-harbour; blocking only via Section 69A, “necessary” under Article 19(2).
- MeitY Sahyog portal 2024 allows Section 79 blocking, challenged by X Corp for overreach.
- EU model: DMA targets gatekeepers; GDPR imposes heavy privacy fines, inspiring Indian ex-ante approach.
Regulatory Challenges
- Lag: Competition Act lacks data-dominance tools; framed for price/output, not network effects.
- Fragmentation: CCI, MeitY, yet-to-form Data Protection Board operate with weak coordination.
- Transnationality: Cross-border operations hinder territorial enforcement; Meta simultaneously probed in US, EU, Australia.
Proposed Reforms
- Recommendation: Digital Market & Data Unit inside CCI for time-bound digital cases.
- Mandate: Algorithm transparency, interoperability, prohibition on cross-platform data sharing sans explicit consent.
- Shift: Ex-ante scrutiny of SSDEs to curb lock-ins; central anonymised data repository for fair access.
Key Data Points
| Feature | Data-Point |
|---|---|
| CCI penalty on Meta | ₹213 crore |
| Data-sharing ban length | 5 years |
| Appellate body staying order | NCLAT |
| Deposit ordered by NCLAT | 50 % of fine |
| Law invoked by CCI | Competition Act 2002 |
| Privacy policy under scanner | WhatsApp 2021 update |
| Proposed new statute | Digital Competition Act (CDCL 2023) |
| Tag for large platforms | SSDEs in Digital Competition Bill 2024 |
| Data law passed | DPDP Act 2023 |
| Blocking rule upheld in Shreya Singhal | IT Act Section 69A |








