This article is written by Anish of BALLB Hon’s of 3rd Year of PUSSGRC Hoshiapur (Panjab University), an intern under Legal Vidhiya
ABSTRACT
Web 3.0 is the next thing. It helps in providing people freedom, power, and smart technology. It’s different from earlier forms because blockchain and smart contract technology give users ownership and control over their data. People are rethinking long-held beliefs about who owns information, privacy, government control, and duty because of this new rule about the media. The rules might need to be changed because of digital identities, decentralized platforms, and material made by AI. When you use Web 3.0, you give people more power, but it’s also harder to handle fake news, copyright issues, and media platforms. We need to find new ways to do things to protect democratic values and the general good.
KEYWORDS
Web 3.0, Decentralization, Blockchain, Smart Contracts, Data Ownership, Privacy, Digital Identity, AI-Generated Content, Misinformation, Media Regulation
INTRODUCTION
We are now moving on to Web 3.0, which will make the internet smarter, less controlled, and guided by users. In Web 1.0, pages didn’t change. But Web 2.0 sites like social networks were always getting better. On the other hand, Web 3.0’s give the users more control on their data with the help of blockchain and smart contracts. After this, we need to think about what we believe in terms of freedom, rules, and who owns the media. On the Web 3.0, anyone can make, own, and share information without going through a central figure. In terms of the law, this makes things harder. These days, media law has to deal with digital identities, material made by AI, and fake news that spreads on open networks. Some of the old rules might not work as well in this new world that is open and hard to understand. Laws need to be changed so that people can still be held responsible even when they use new ideas. In a democracy, this will help keep ideas like duty, honesty, and fairness alive. Web 3.0 is more than just a new tool, yes. You can also change how you feel about being in charge, having hope, and having power.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WEB 1.0, WEB 2.0 AND WEB 3.0
There is the difference between all three webs, which were developed in today’s world from time to time. Web 1.0 was like reading a newspaper online; Web 2.0 became more like social media, such as commenting, posting, and interacting; and Web 3.0 is about owning your data and using smart tools without middlemen.
Table No. 1 below shows the difference in a detailed way. (geeks for geeks)
| Feature | Web 1.0 (Read-Only Web) | Web 2.0 (Social Web) | Web 3.0 (Smart & Decentralized Web) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Year | 1990s to early 2000s | Early 2000s to present | Started from 2020 onwards |
| Main Goal | Share basic information | Enable interaction and sharing | Empower users with control and ownership |
| Type of Users | Passive viewer | Active participant (creator, sharer) | Owner and decision-maker |
| Content Type | Static pages (no updates or interaction) | Dynamic content (comments, posts, likes) | AI-generated, personalized, and decentralized content |
| Technology Used | HTML, basic servers | JavaScript, AJAX, social media platforms | Blockchain, AI, smart contracts |
| Who has Data Ownership | Website owners only | Platforms control user data | People are in charge of their own information. |
| What kind of Interaction | Very limited | High (social media, blogs, forums) | Peer-to-peer, trustless systems |
| Intelligence | No intelligence | Low level of Personalization | Machine learning can help us figure out what words mean. |
| Control Structure | Centralized | Centralized (Big Tech companies) | Decentralized (no single authority) |
| Legal Problems | Few websites | Privacy, content moderation, copyright | Identity, misinformation, AI content, regulation |
Table No. 1
PILLARS OF WEB 3.0
We are now in Web 3.0, which is the next level of the internet. It is free, smarter, and more fair than other webs. Web 3.0 is different from Web 2.0, which is operated by huge companies like social networking sites. It leverages technology to let people have more say over what they do, who they are, and what information they share online. Here are some crucial tools that will assist in making this goal come true:
- BLOCKCHAIN- Blockchain is the foundation for Web 3.0. Picture a huge digital notebook that everyone can see and change, but only if you let them. It stores small pieces of information and puts them together. What is the best thing? You can’t alter a block once it’s in place unless the network says you can. This makes it very safe and reliable. Web 3.0 uses the blockchain to keep track of transactions, maintain identities, and develop systems that don’t need a bank or firm to run them.
- SMART CONTRACTS- There is a list of all the smart contracts that have been created. When certain things happen, they do things by themselves. To get a snack, put money in the machine and press a button. You don’t need help from anyone else. All, Web 3.0 apps that handle money, votes, agreements, and awards employ smart contracts. These tools don’t need anyone else. They make things work better and are more fair.
- NFT (NON-FUNGIBLE TOKENS)- NFTs, or “not for sale” things, let you show off your own movies, songs, tweets, and even paintings. “Non-fungible” signifies that they are unique and can’t be traded for anything else. You can trade one Bitcoin for another since they are the same. But no two NFTs are the same. NFTs are a feature of Web 3.0 that give artists a way to safeguard their work and get compensated directly by fans, without having to rely on major names or platforms.
- DAO (DECENTRALIZED AUTONOMOUS ORGANIZATIONS)- DAOs are groups or communities on the internet that don’t have a clear leader. People vote together to make decisions, and they commonly utilize bitcoin for this. Smart contracts make the rules plain, so anyone may speak up. Most companies have a boss or CEO who makes all the important decisions. Web 3.0 is more open, and fair because it lets people have a say in how things work.
- SEMANTIC WEB- This project’s goal is to make the web better. Because most websites were made for people to use, bots can’t read them. What does it mean to “data”? This is what the Semantic Web does: it gives data more “semantics” so computers can use it better. If you type “apple” into Google, it can figure out from the rest of the line whether you mean the fruit or the tech company. The Web 3.0 has made it possible to connect information in smarter and better ways.
IMPLICATIONS OF WEB 3.0 FOR MEDIA LAW
With Web 3.0, people read, share, and build things online in new ways. Because of this, it’s hard to obey the rules of the media. It means that no one government or business will be in charge of the internet. There are more ideas and freedoms now, but it’s harder to keep an eye on what people are saying, make sure they are following the law, and protect content creators. It changes these places in six important ways:
- INTANGIBLE PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT- While it is simpler to create and share digital material in Web 3.0, it is less obvious who owns what. With an NFT, you can prove that you own a digital piece of art, music, or video. It’s uncommon to find someone who will donate or sell you something without being asked. Laws must now cover digital ownership, blockchain-based records, and smart contracts that protect creators. Traditional IP rules need updates to match Web 3.0’s fast, global content flow.
- CONTENT LIABILITY AND MODERATION- The government checks Web 2.0 sites like YouTube and Instagram for material that could be harmful. In Web 3.0, it’s not common for a single authority to keep an eye on what people post on decentralized sites. Who is to blame if someone posts fake news, hate speech, or media that is against the law? The law needs to figure out who is responsible when it’s not clear who wrote or moderated something. DAOs, which stand for “decentralized autonomous organizations,” might be able to help by letting people decide what to do and making rules that make sense.
- DATA PRIVACY AND PROTECTION- Web 3.0 gives individuals some ownership over their data through blockchain technology, and there is much ahead even though it is hush now. If, the information is maintained on a public blockchain, it might be hard to update or delete. You can only offer each country a certain amount of data. That way, everyone will be safe and have an equal chance to use public information. The press should know about the work (what to do) before doing by the government. People who write, teach, and work in the media need to think about this more.
- JURISDICTION AND ENFORCEMENT- With Web 3.0, content may swiftly flow between nations, and sites don’t have to be based in just one. What country’s law applies when people break the rules? Are you Indian, American, or neither? Following the court’s directions gets harder. What rights do users have to remove fake news from an app that isn’t centralized? Countries must collaborate more and provide people more ways to respect the law while they are online. This is what the law about the media needs to do.
- FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION VS REGULATION- A lot of people can talk to each other on Web 3.0 sites. But bad people can use it, like when they lie or say hurtful things. While governments may want to keep things in check, giving people too much power could make it harder for them to say what they think. The rules for the press should find a balance between job and freedom of speech. Fair content might be possible with smart contracts and community votes (through DAOs). To keep things fair, no one person would have too much power.
- LICENSING AND ROYALTIES- People who make products can get compensated directly for their work with NFTs. Smart contracts can make sure that artists get paid every time someone else utilizes their work. That said, the current license regulations don’t function with blockchain systems. We need to update the regulations about how to pay people and keep track of money. In the age of Web 3.0, this makes sure that writers, artists, filmmakers, and designers get paid what they are worth.
LAWS MADE BY THE GOVERNMENT
- DIGITAL PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION ACT, 2023 (DPDP ACT)
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act was made for the consumers under this act consumers can control their own personal data. They can choose who gets it, change it, or ask for it to be taken off. You can’t modify or take out anything that has already been added to a blockchain, though. This act provides “right to be forgotten,” to the consumers which implies that they can delete their information. When broadcasters utilize bitcoin, they have to follow the law. One thing they should do is make sure that private information is not retained on the blockchain or is kept very safe. These methods assist in keeping users’ rights safe while still following the requirements for self-driving automobiles. It protects people’s private information and comes up with fresh concepts.
- INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 & IT RULES, 2021
The government altered the regulations concerning IT to make it easier for all sorts of websites to work, including those that use Web 3.0. Even if the network is decentralized, these sites need to be transparent about their privacy policies and let users know how to report problems. There are also standards about digital media ethics that suggest material should be respectful and responsible. It is against the law to break into a system or divulge private information without permission, according to Sections 66 and 72A of the IT Act. These rules also apply to new technologies, such as Bitcoin apps. They keep people safe and make sure that platforms are in charge in the internet world.
- CERT-IN CYBER SECURITY DIRECTIONS (2022)
Laws made by the Indian government say that a company must tell the national cyber agency, CERT-In, within six hours if it is hacked or has its data stolen. This rule applies to sites that use blockchain, VPN services, and cryptocurrency exchangers. There are also logs that these companies must keep for 180 days and keep safe in India. Logs are records of that thing which their systems do. The IT Act indicates that anyone who violates these laws could be fined or imprisoned. The intent is to improve safety and force companies to close any security gaps right away. In doing so, it protects people.
- DIGITAL INDIA ACT (PROPOSED)
The proposed framework is intended to modernize India’s digital governance in a way that brings the Information Technology Act into a more adaptive, future-oriented law. It emphasizes user rights first and foremost, given the many associated risks of misinformation, deep fakes, AI misuse, and more. The proposed law also can respond to the growing ethical dilemmas surrounding new technologies like blockchain and is ready to encourage good innovation in technology. Most importantly, it works to position “Digital Nagriks,” or citizens living in a digital age, with power transparently and responsibly, with safety assurances. The framework also has the dual purpose of crafting safety nets and opportunities for technological development, with the aim of protecting the public interest. Ultimately, it is about making India’s technology space safer for all while still being relatively open to those who wish to participate.
CASE LAWS
- INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION OF INDIA VS RBI (CRYPTOCURRENCT BAN CASE, 2020)
They stated that the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) decision to bar banks from working with cryptocurrency startups was against the law and based on an old circular. The Court said that the RBI’s ban was an unfair means to limit Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution, which provides that everyone has the freedom to trade. The Court agreed with the RBI that cryptocurrencies can be dangerous and noted that any laws should make sense and be based on substantial evidence. The verdict permitted people in India to buy and sell bitcoin and said that there should be standards to make sure everyone is treated fairly.
- JUVENTUS VS NFT CREATOR (ROME COURT, 2022)
In 2022, the Rome Court had a landmark ruling for Juventus Football Club against NFT creator Blockeras. Blockeras began to sell digital trading cards featuring Juventus’ trademarks as a part of NFTs, including the name and iconic jersey. While Blockeras had rights to use the image of player Christian Vieri, the court clarified Blockeras had no rights to Juventus branding. The digital trading cards were sold as non-fungible tokens and for profit. This profit and the use of Juventus trademarks led to confusion as to whether or not there was an official link between the digital tokens and the football club. The Court ruled the case was related to the trademark infringement and unfair competition in the market. The court ordered Blockeras to cease selling the non-fungible tokens and remove them from all platforms. The result of this case was a landmark ruling as it relates to intellectual property rights around NFTs.
- HERMES VS ROTHSCHILD (META BIRKINS CASE, 2023)
A jury in the U.S. sided with Hermès in a case against artist Mason Rothschild in 2023. Rothschild produced and sold NFTs called “MetaBirkin”, which are digital images of her famous design, the Birkin bag. Some believed the NFTs were legitimately associated with Hermès since the brand said Rothschild was using their name without their knowledge. Rothschild insisted it was art and was protected by free speech rights. In this case, he was found guilty for copyright infringement, dilution, and cybersquatting. They remediated the problem by issuing a check to Hermès valued at $133,000. It set an incredibly high watermark for protecting intellectual property online, especially as the NFT realm continues to grow.
CONCLUSION
“Web 3.0 is changing the digital landscape and its effects on it in that it is giving users much more power over their data, identity, and content creation via decentralized technologies such as blockchain and smart contracts. While this shift power from institutions back to individuals is one element of importance, it provokes more complex questions for media law in the areas of copyright, misinformation, digital rights, and jurisdiction. It is clear that the rules and regulations around holding users accountable, ensuring fairness, supporting protection, and ensuring innovation need to be changed in order to support democratic processes in this new system. If we are going to endorse adaptable regulations and participatory frameworks, we are going to have to navigate the new frontier in which technology will provide an amalgam of freedom and responsibility in the digital space.”
REFERENCES
- https://www.livelaw.in/law-firms/law-firm-articles-/cybersecurity-data-privacy-web-30-data-privacy-blockchains-digital-personal-data-protection-act-smart-contracts-poly-network-information-technology-act-mobikwik-data-293689
- https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2025/05/30/web-3-0-dispute-resolution-how-blockchain-litigation-is-shaping-the-future-of-law/
- https://lawgazette.com.sg/practice/tech-talk/explainer-web-3-0-for-lawyers/
- https://esquarelegal.com/exploring-the-legal-implications-of-web-3-0-a-comprehensive-guide-to-the-emergence-of-decentralized-law/
- https://harris-sliwoski.com/practice-areas/web-3-0-law/
- INTERNET AND MOBILE ASSOCIATION OF INDIA VS RBI (CRYPTOCURRENCT BAN CASE, 2020)
- https://www.legalbites.in/landmark-judgements/case-summary-internet-and-mobile-association-of-india-v-reserve-bank-of-india-2020-cryptocurrency-case-1069763
- JUVENTUS VS NFT CREATOR (ROME COURT, 2022)
- https://www.mondaq.com/italy/trademark/1255084/juventus-fc-scores-landmark-win-for-a-tm-infringement-case-in-the-metaverse
- HERMES VS ROTHSCHILD (META BIRKINS CASE, 2023)
- https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2023/02/jury-finds-that-metabirkin-nfts-infringed-hermes-trademark-rights
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is personal.
