Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Neetu Singh - Appellant
Versus
Telegram FZ LLC - Respondent
CS (COMM) 282 of 2020
Decided On : 30-08-2022
The court held that, in the context of copyright enforcement, online platforms like Telegram can be held liable for facilitating or enabling infringement activities conducted through their services. Despite the platform's status as an intermediary, it is not entitled to absolute immunity when it actively participates in or facilitates infringing activities. The court emphasized that the platform's role in hosting or sharing infringing content can lead to its liability, especially when it fails to take prompt action upon becoming aware of such infringement (!) .
Regarding the Safe Harbor provisions under the IT Act, 2000, the court clarified that these protections are not absolute. Intermediaries are afforded certain immunities provided they act expeditiously to remove or disable access to infringing content upon receiving actual knowledge or being notified of such infringement. However, this immunity does not extend to situations where the intermediary is found to have knowingly facilitated or contributed to infringing activities. The court underscored that the protections under the IT Act do not prevent the disclosure of user information or the identification of infringing parties when ordered by a court, especially in cases involving copyright violations (!) .
In summary, the court reinforced that while intermediaries benefit from certain protections under the IT Act, these are conditional and do not shield them from liability in cases of active facilitation of infringement. The platform's obligation to cooperate with lawful orders for disclosure and takedown is reaffirmed, and its liability is contingent upon its level of involvement and promptness in addressing infringing content (!) .
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
I.A. 8461/2020 (u/O XI CPC seeking discovery and directions to Defendant No. 1 to disclose identity of infringing channels)
Brief Facts
1. The Plaintiffs - Ms. Neetu Singh and K.D. Campus Pvt. Ltd. have filed the present suit seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of copyright, damages and other reliefs in respect of unauthorized dissemination of the Plaintiffs' videos, lecture, books, etc.
2. The case of the Plaintiffs is that Plaintiff No.1 is a renowned author of books which are designed to train students aspiring to take various competitive examinations including the examinations of Staff Selection Commission (SSC), Bank Probationary Officer (PO), CDS, NDA, etc. Plaintiff No.1 - Ms. Neetu Singh founded Plaintiff No.2 - M/s K.D. Campus, which runs coaching centres for these competitive exams. The suit has been filed by the Plaintiffs against Defendant No.1/Telegram FZ LLC (hereinafter "Telegram") and Defendant No.2/John Doe, i.e., unknown persons.
3. The Telegram app is a messaging platform capable of being downloaded on mobile phones, computers, tabs and other similar gadgets, which enables transmission of text, audio files, video files, images, documents etc. The allegation in the suit is that the Plaintiffs' copyrighted works including course material, online lectures and other works are being disseminated unauthorizedly through various Telegram channels, some of which, as set out in the plaint, are as under:
4. The Plaintiffs aver that on these channels, videos of the lectures delivered by Plaintiff No.1 are being uploaded on a daily basis and being made accessible to students at discounted rates. The screenshots of the said videos are extracted in the plaint. The Plaintiffs also found that the books of the Plaintiffs including books titled `Plinth to Paramount' etc. are being circulated in PDF formats on Telegram channels.
5. In so far as Telegram's role is concerned, according to the Plaintiffs, as per the Privacy Policy of Telegram, any abuse on Telegram channels can be reported. Accordingly, after acquiring knowledge of the illegal dissemination of the Plaintiffs' works, e-mails were sent to the e-mail addresses where abuse can be reported including abuse@telegram.org and dmca@telegram.org, and the Plaintiffs called upon Telegram to take down the impugned channels. Upon receipt of the said n
AI
Disclosure of infringers' identities is essential for copyright owners to seek damages, reinforcing the enforcement of rights under the Copyright Act despite technological challenges.
The judgment establishes the legal principle that unauthorized dissemination of copyrighted material on digital platforms constitutes copyright infringement, and digital platforms have a responsibili....
Section 55 of Act deals with civil remedies for infringement of copyright, but it would be maintainable on a presumption that copyright has been infringed unless contrary is proved.
An intermediary, such as the petitioner, is entitled to claim protection under Section 79 of the I.T. Act when compliance with the 'due diligence' requirement under Rule 3 of the I.T. Guidelines is e....
Pornographic website – Social media account compromised - Removal or access disablement of offending content to be effective even within India, a search engine must block the search results througho....
Digital intermediaries are statutorily exempt from liability for third-party content. They are not required to adjudicate the veracity or defamatory nature of online publications until presented with....
Unauthorized exploitation of copyrighted content, previously licensed, does not qualify as fair dealing or de minimis.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
