TV9 Scores Victory: Delhi HC Shields News Network from 'Groundless' YouTube Copyright Strikes

In a significant win for news broadcasters, the Delhi High Court has declared that TV9 Network 's use of brief video clips depicting hurricanes, floods, and global conflicts does not infringe copyright. Justice Tejas Karia granted summary judgment against four foreign entities, restraining them from issuing further threats and affirming fair dealing protections under India's Copyright Act .

Stormy Claims: How Copyright Strikes Hit TV9's YouTube Channels

Associated Broadcasting Company Limited , operating the TV9 Network , runs popular YouTube channels like TV9TeluguLive and TV9Bharatvarsh alongside its TV channels and websites in multiple languages. Between 2020 and 2023 , TV9 uploaded news videos covering real-world events—Laura Hurricane, Israel-Hamas war, New York floods, Chinese spy balloon, and more—incorporating short online-sourced footage amid original commentary.

In December 2023 , strikes flooded in from Defendants 2-5: US-based media brokers, digital rights managers, a weather videographer follower, and a Turkish news provider. These claimed ownership of "Subject Works" (raw event footage) used in TV9's "Subject Videos." Strikes risked channel termination under YouTube policy after three notices. TV9 countered with notifications citing fair dealing and de minimis use, but claimants filed a US suit (later voluntarily dismissed against TV9's channels) and demanded confidential revenue data.

YouTube ( Google LLC , Defendant 1) acted as intermediary, removing some videos pending resolution but clarifying it doesn't adjudicate merits. Defendants 2-5 ignored Indian summons, leading to ex parte proceedings .

TV9's Defense: Fair Use, Tiny Clips, and Licensed Sources

TV9 argued no copyright subsists in raw, non-creative footage of natural calamities and current affairs—universal facts lacking originality. Even if protected, usage fell under Section 52(1)(a)(iii) for " fair dealing " in news reporting: clips lasted 4-65 seconds in videos of 1-50 minutes, embedded in analysis-heavy reports.

Plaintiff highlighted de minimis doctrine — " the law does not concern itself with trifles " —citing India TV Independent News Service Pvt. Ltd. vs. Yashraj Films Pvt. Ltd. (2012), where trivial copying caused no harm. Much footage came from licensor APTN 's portal under a 2014 agreement. Communications from claimants' US lawyers were "threatening," demanding business secrets without proving ownership.

Defendants 2-5 filed no written statement; Google stayed neutral, deferring to courts.

Court's Sharp Lens: Dissecting Fair Dealing and Empty Threats

Justice Karia invoked Order XIIIA CPC for summary judgment , deeming defendants' non-appearance as no real defense. Key tests: clips' brevity (e.g., 4 seconds in 3:29 video), news context, no standalone exploitation, and uncontroverted APTN licensing.

Precedents in Play: - ESPN Star Sports v. Global Broadcast News Ltd. (2008): Cricket clips for news reporting = fair dealing . - India TV (supra) : De minimis filters trivial claims without harm. - Manya Vejju @ MV Kasi vs. Sapna Bhog ( Bombay HC , 2023): Groundless threats under Section 60 require diligent prosecution; voluntary US dismissal doesn't count.

The court rejected strikes as "groundless" per Section 60 proviso—US case wasn't "commenced and prosecuted" to merits against TV9. Strike notices alone aren't judicial actions.

Integrating media reports, the ruling echoes concerns over foreign entities' aggressive YouTube monetization tactics via weather footage, protecting Indian news from overreach.

Key Observations from the Bench

"The portions of the Subject Works are of limited and segmented duration, forming part of a larger narrative and commentary contained in the Subject Videos. The use... is embedded within the overall programme content and is not shown to be a standalone broadcast or independent commercial exploitation."

"In view of the limited duration of the Subject Works used in the Subject Videos, the context of news reporting, and no demonstrated harm... the Subject Videos would fall within the doctrine of fair use and de minimis non curat lex ."

"Commencement of ‘an action for infringement...’ and its voluntary dismissal... cannot be construed as a bar to granting relief under Section 60 ."

Decree Delivered: No Infringement, Threats Banned

"Defendant Nos. 2 to 5... are restrained from issuing any groundless threats to the Plaintiff alleging copyright infringement in respect of the Subject Videos. It is further declared that the Subject Videos and the usage of the Subject Works therein do not constitute copyright infringement of the Subject Works."

The suit stands decreed in TV9's favor against Defendants 2-5; no relief against Google. TV9 dropped damages claims. This bolsters news media's leeway for brief, transformative clips, curbing abusive strikes while signaling platforms like YouTube must await court verdicts. Future cases may cite it to fend off similar foreign claims, prioritizing public interest reporting.