IAPP Exam CIPP-A Topic 2 Question 69 Discussion

Actual exam question for IAPP's CIPP-A exam

Question #: 69
Topic #: 2

[All CIPP-A Questions]

In 2015, Section 66A of India's IT Act was ruled unconstitutional. What did this section previously prohibit?

APublishing images with sexually explicit content.

BTampering with computer source documents.

CPublishing private images of others.

DSending offensive messages.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: D

by Taryn at Sep 14, 2024, 08:34 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CIPP-A Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Geraldo

2 months ago

Offensive messages, huh? Sounds like the legislators were a bunch of snowflakes. D is the winner here, no doubt.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rickie

2 months ago

Ah, the good old days of the 'Draconian Statutes' era. Thank goodness those are behind us now. D is the correct answer, I reckon.

upvoted 0 times

...

Zona

2 months ago

My money's on option D. Sending offensive messages online? What could go wrong with that? *rolls eyes*

upvoted 0 times

Chana

24 days ago

I agree with you, D. Sending offensive messages can have serious consequences.

upvoted 0 times

...

Emmett

25 days ago

I believe it was A. Publishing images with sexually explicit content is definitely not okay.

upvoted 0 times

...

Aleta

26 days ago

I think it was C. Publishing private images of others is a serious violation of privacy.

upvoted 0 times

...

Brunilda

2 months ago

Actually, it was publishing images with sexually explicit content.

upvoted 0 times

...

Stevie

2 months ago

I believe it was sending offensive messages.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sharan

3 months ago

Seriously, who thought it was a good idea to criminalize 'offensive messages'? Talk about a violation of free speech.

upvoted 0 times

...

Brunilda

3 months ago

I think it prohibited publishing private images of others.

upvoted 0 times

...

Quinn

3 months ago

Section 66A was a huge overreach, I'm glad it was struck down. Option D all the way!

upvoted 0 times

Myong

2 months ago

Section 66A was definitely overreaching. Option D was a clear infringement on our rights.

upvoted 0 times

...

Horace

2 months ago

I'm glad Section 66A was ruled unconstitutional. Option D was a violation of free speech.

upvoted 0 times

...

Niesha

2 months ago

Sending offensive messages should not be a criminal offense. Option D is the way to go.

upvoted 0 times

...

An

2 months ago

I agree, Section 66A was too restrictive. Option D is definitely the right choice.

upvoted 0 times

...