STATE OF THE MEDIA REPORT QUARTER 3. 2020 Zambia36? Does it mean all the 2.5 million people (including churches, companies and other entities) would have to be licensed by the IBA if they were to stream content on their Facebook pages? How will other users streaming live and pre-recorded content on video sites such as YouTube and other platforms be treated? What about content streamed on a social network from a different geographical and legal jurisdiction but still accessed by the Zambian public? What will be the responsibility and role of internet intermediaries 37 and will they also be accountable to the Authority38? The second consideration revolves around the provisions of the Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) Act 15 of 2009 (as amended by Act No. 3 of 2010) as well as the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 21 of 2009 both of which are superintended over by the Zambia Information and Communications Technology Authority (ZICTA). The Acts, in addition to other statutes, empower ZICTA with the mandate to regulate various information and communication technologies, including those that are internet based. As such, any offences committed by any internet user, such as the individuals behind Spring TV, would rightly be handled by ZICTA or particular law enforcement agencies depending on the nature of the offence. The move by the IBA to claim jurisdiction over content shared on a social networking platform-such as Facebook-has the potential to create a legal and professional conundrum with far-reaching consequences. What is needed, instead, is a careful review of the IBA Act to bring it up to date with the changes in technology while harmonising the same with existing provisions under the ICT Act and the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act. It is, therefore, no wonder that the https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/apc%E2%80%99sfrequently-asked-questions-internet-intermed 36 See https://napoleoncat.com/stats/facebookusers-in-zambia/2020/09 38 Internet intermediary liability” means the legal responsibility (“liability”) of intermediaries for illegal or harmful activities performed by users through their services. “Liability” means that intermediaries have an obligation to prevent the occurrence of unlawful or harmful activity by users of their services. Failure to do so may result in legal orders compelling the intermediary to act or expose the intermediary to civil or criminal legal action. See https://www.apc.org/en/pubs/apc%E2%80%99sfrequently-asked-questions-internet-intermed 37 An internet intermediary is an entity which provides services that enable people to use the internet. There are many different kinds of internet intermediaries which fall into two broad categories: “conduits” and “hosts”. “Conduits” are technical providers of internet access or transmission services. Conduits do not interfere with the content they are transmitting other than for automatic, intermediate or transient storage needed for transmission. “Hosts” are providers of content services – for instance, online platforms and storage services. Read more at 33