Semiconductor talent ecosystem already exists, now focus on owning IP in India: Rajeev Chandrasekhar

When the prime minister launched the Semicon India programme back in 2021 with Rs 76,000 crore of funding support from the government, one of the big elements of that was the issue of creating future design capabilities in India for chips of the future, the next generation of semiconductor design, that the next generation of IC (integrated circuit) chip design, must come out of India, the IP (intellectual property) for that should be co-owned, if not owned by Indian startups. For that, we have designed a programme called the Future Design DLI. A large number of startups have applied and we are going through a screening process where the best and the brightest of the startups get government funding directly. And so, in tomorrow's programme, the next batch of startups that have been selected are being announced. We will have, I think, by March 2023, almost 20 to 25 semiconductor startups that have all been created in the last two to three years.

It's believed a lot of people in semiconductor design are Indian who are usually based abroad. Is there a plan to attract this talent back to India and help them start up here?

There are already around 80,000 engineers in India who are today working for all of the big majors on semiconductors… Almost every global semiconductor major is in India today, getting things designed.

I think that the ecosystem of talent already exists, we are now basically encouraging talent to create startups and make sure that the next generation of devices are not just designed in India but also IP-owned in India or co-owned in India. That is a very strategic imperative, very important objective in terms of the next year in terms of the pivot of the semiconductor ecosystem in India, and that is what we're focused on.

What kind of support will colleges get to train students in semiconductor design, and will it also be included in the government’s tech skilling plans?

A comprehensive framework of curriculum reforms has been authored, it has been handed over to the AICTE (All India Council for Technical Education) and it will implement from this academic year itself. From the 2023-24 academic year, the Indian higher education system and the skilling ecosystem will start focusing on creating and producing world-class semiconductor engineers and semiconductor technicians.

On the semiconductor PLI (production-linked incentive) front, have you zeroed in on how many firms have got it and are there any challenges?

There is a capital subsidy programme for the semiconductor fabrication sector. Those are being evaluated still, at least two of those applicants in the fab space aren't qualified or could not be qualified—because in at least one case, the Tower Intel case, because they are going through an acquisition by Intel, they cannot proceed forward at this stage. While that proposal is still on hold, it is not something that we will be able to review and comment on in the short term till the Intel Tower acquisition closes. The other proposal is the Vedanta Foxconn proposal, that is under active consideration. I suspect very soon we'll be in a position to decide whether that proposal goes forward or not.

A few lending apps were recently blocked, some were unblocked as well after that. Can you shed some light on what happened on that front? Did they have ties to China, etc.?

There is no decision that the government takes that is geography-based. If applications or apps or websites or content are taken down, they're taken down purely through the prism of user harm, or security and national sovereignty risks, as they are evaluated by different ministries. These applications were evaluated and as is the normal course, they all have the right to appeal. If certain applications were taken down because of some infirmities, they are always allowed to appeal once those infirmities are cured and that is a process that the government of India has always undertaken and will continue.

The government has been exploring the path of self-regulation for fake news. You also met a couple of social media companies last week. How will this self-regulating mechanism work? What happens if social media companies cannot reach a consensus?

We have never said self-regulation for fake news. Today the IT rules make it mandatory that if any social media intermediary or any intermediary wants to enjoy the Section 69 safe haven that has immunity from prosecution for content on a platform, they have some obligations vis-a-vis the content that they host on the platform. If they abide by those conditions, they are immune from prosecution, if they don't abide by those conditions, then they are open to be prosecuted by whoever is the victim of the content that's on the platform.

The conversation we had recently was about fact checkers and we intend that government information is fact-checked by the PIB (Press Information Bureau) and for the private sector, we must evolve a regime of trusted fact checkers. In that context, it was suggested by somebody in the industry that instead of the government deciding who the trusted fact checker is, that the industry form a self-regulatory body that would then certify who a trusted fact checker could be. And I said, yes, we are open to that conversation as long as the industry comes back with something that is workable, we are absolutely open to a self-regulated body that in essence certifies who a trusted fact checker can be or cannot be.

There have been concerns about the definition of the age of children as people below the age of 18. Is the government looking to rephrase that definition?

I think you're talking about this from the point of view of the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Bill, that the age is 18 and anything below that requires parental consent. It is a difficult issue on which to get consensus, because there are people who believe children should be trusted enough to take their own decisions from an early age of 14 and there are people who believe that there are platforms that exploit children and, therefore, children should be protected from the platform.

It is a difficult balance to draw, I think we will agree that it will be 18 to start with. It will certainly be reviewed very frequently to see if there are certain platforms that are creating safe spaces for children, in which case those platforms can be given a lower age for children versus some platforms that are going to be continuing the exploitative practices that will have a higher bar for children. That is broadly the thinking in the government as we go forward.

ChatGPT, conversational AI is all the rage now. How is the government looking to address artificial intelligence-related concerns, such as algorithmic accountability?

It's a known issue. We know it, we know that there are many challenges in the innovation ecosystem. I have pointed to and I've suggested or hinted or indeed, emphatically made known, that around the corner we will have a Digital India Act, which is a contemporary new legislation that will supersede the IT Act, which is, as you know, 22 years old. The Digital India Act will take care of a lot of these issues, including the issues and risks of emerging technologies like AI.

Do we have a timeline for when the bill will be introduced?

We are working flat out. As you know, we've done a lot in the last one year. Online gaming is around the corner, DPDP is around the corner. We will have the DIA as early as we can, but without compromising our commitment to having extensive public consultation and engagement before a bill is legislated.