Bombay High Court ‘Tie-Breaker’ Judge Finds 2023 Amendment To IT Rules For Establishing Fact Check Units ‘Unconstitutional’
The ‘tie-breaker’ judge of the Bombay High Court on Friday struck down the 2023 amendments to the IT Rules, which empowers the Central government to establish Fact Check Units (FCUs) to identify “fake and misleading” information about its business on social media platforms.
Earlier, in the Split Verdict of the Divison Bench, Justice Patel had struck down the rules in entirety and Justice Gokhale had upheld the validity of the Rules. Following the split verdict, the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court had in February appointed Justice Chandurkar as the ‘tie-breaker’ judge to hear the matter and give a final opinion on the petitions.
Read our piece analysing the split verdict pronounced earlier in the year here.
Justice Chandurkar said the amendments also violate Article 21 and do not satisfy the “test of proportionality”.
Social media intermediaries like ‘X’, ‘Instagram’ and ‘Facebook.’ would either have to take down the content or add a disclaimer once the government’s FCU identifies the content on their platform, the amended rules mandate.
The petitioners claimed the two Rules are ultra vires to Sections 79 which safeguards intermediaries from action against third-party content and Section 87(2)(z) and (zg) of the IT Act 2000. Further they violate fundamental rights granting citizen ‘equal protection under the law’ under Article 14 & freedom of speech under Articles 19(1)(a) & 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, it was contended.
However, the Ministry of Information and Technology has claimed that it would be in public interest for “authentic information” related to the government’s business to be ascertained and disseminated after fact checking by a government agency (FCU) “so that the potential harm to the public at large can be contained.”
Delhi High Court Passes ‘Dynamic+’ Injunction To Protect Copyrighted Works Of Warner Bros, Netflix & Others
The Delhi High Court has recently passed a dynamic+ injunction to protect the copyrighted works of Warner Bros, Netflix, Disney and other global entertainment companies.
A fresh suit was filed by global entities against 45 rogue websites seeking to restrain them from hosting and streaming their copyrighted works in various movies and shows. The suit was filed by Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc., Netflix US, LLC, SBS Co. Ltd., SLL Joongagng Co. Ltd. and CJ ENM Co. Ltd.
It was alleged that the infringing websites were carrying and disseminating the copyrighted content without any license or authorization from the entertainment companies.
Justice Saurabh Banerjee said that it was a classic case exhibiting the evolution of “hydra-headed” DNRs or websites for streaming and making available to the public any copyrighted content without appropriate licensing. The court added that the mushrooming of the rogue websites, clubbed by their blatant and utter slavish activities with ulterior purposes, cannot be allowed to continue.
The court passed an ex parte ad interim injunction and restrained the rogue websites from streaming or hosting the copyrighted works of the plaintiffs. It further ordered that access to the infringing websites be blocked by internet service providers.
Read order here.
Kangana Ranaut in trouble again as Chandigarh court issues notice against ‘Emergency’
Kangana Ranaut has been facing ongoing challenges surrounding the release of her directorial film ‘Emergency’. On 18th September,2024, she encountered a fresh set of problems, adding to the delays and controversies that have already plagued the film’s release when a district court in Chandigarh has issued a notice to Kangana Ranaut regarding her film ‘Emergency’.
Former president of the District Bar Association, advocate Ravinder Singh Bassi, has reportedly filed an application alleging that Kangana has attempted to tarnish the image of the Sikh Community in the film. He further claims that the upcoming release contains several false allegations against the Sikh community and has called for a case to be registered against the actress.
‘Emergency’ is set against the backdrop of the Emergency period in India that was imposed by the late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Meanwhile, the advocate’s plea comes just days after accused Kangana and the film of misrepresenting the community and twisting historical facts.
‘Emergency’ was initially scheduled for release on September 6 but was delayed due to pending censor board approval. The film has also faced calls for boycotts and bans from various Sikh organizations, who accuse it of misrepresenting their community.
CBFC announces implementation of ‘Accessibility Standards’ in cinema theatres
‘Accessibility Standards’ aimed at making cinema ‘inclusive and promote accessibility’ for persons with disabilities in public places like theatres, has come into effect.
The guidelines were notified by the ministry of information and broadcasting (MI&B) in March. As per the guidelines, a producer will mandatorily develop a separate copy of the feature films with audio description, open or closed captioning and Indian Sign Language Interpretation for their understanding.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting had set 15th September 2024, as the effective date for implementation of these guidelines.
Feature films submitted for consideration in the National Film Awards and in the Indian Panorama Section of the International Film Festival of India (IFFI) and other film festivals organized by the ministry will mandatorily include closed captioning and audio description with effect from January 1, 2025.
All other Feature Films being certified through CBFC including the teasers and trailers and meant for theatrical release (digital feature films), would be required to mandatorily provide accessibility features from March 3, 2026.
The objective of these guidelines is to provide an enabling framework to support the development of a culture and practice of accessibility of feature films for persons with hearing and visual impairment, the ministry had said
The initiative aligns with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act), which mandates government action to promote universal access and inclusion in information and communication, including access to films, said ministry.
The guidelines say that the theatre owners will develop self-regulatory plans for accessibility, following consultations with disability stakeholders and implement accessibility features within two years. Also, Viewers can file complaints with theatre licensees if accessible features are unavailable and the Committee will address their concerns within 30 days through the licensing authority.
IBM wins $44.9 million patent infringement suit against Zynga
Tech company IBM won its lawsuit against mobile developer Zynga, which it sued over patent infringement in 2022.
Two years ago, IBM claimed the Farmville creator was misusing its “foundational” web technology, including data capture and analytics. The two companies had reportedly been negotiating a license since 2014, but those talks repeatedly fell through. Previously, in another law suit, Zynga was one of many internet companies IBM took legal action against.
The federal court found multiple Zynga games fell within the bounds of patent violation. Specific titles listed include the Farmville sequels, Crosswords with Friends, and Wizard of Oz Slots.
With the court in its favor, IBM has been awarded $44.9 million in damages. However, Zynga has made a statement that those patents were invalid, and the developer (and its owner Take-Two) plan on appealing the verdict.
Gov. Gavin Newsom Signs AI Bills Backed by SAG-AFTRA
California Gov. Gavin Newsom visited SAG-AFTRA headquarters on Monday to sign two bills regulating the use of performances generated by artificial intelligence.
The actors’ union lobbied for passage of the legislation, which builds on the protections won during the four-month actors’ strike against the major studios last year. The bills cover a wider range of performances than film and TV, including voiceover work, commercials and video game performances.
The entertainment bills have been less controversial. The Motion Picture Association, which represents the major studios, initially opposed them, but switched its position to neutral once amendments were made to protect standard post-production techniques and free speech rights.
The other, AB 1836, extends the same principle to deceased performers, granting the performer’s estate the right to consent to an AI replica. The right lasts 70 years after the performer’s death.
Newsom signed the bills alongside Fran Drescher, the president of the actors’ union, Joely Fisher, the secretary-treasurer, and Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, the executive director. SAG-AFTRA is pushing for similar legislation in Congress, the No Fakes Act, which would outlaw non-consensual replicas of anyone, including performers.
TRAI excludes Google, WhatsApp, Telegram and others from new licensing rules
The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has proposed new recommendations aimed at simplifying the licensing process under Telecom Act. Importantly, the regulatory body has excluded Over-The-Top (OTT) services like WhatsApp, Telegram & other such Platforms under this licensing regime.
The new recommendations advocate for a single, unified authorisation system across different services and regions – a “One Nation One Authorization” framework.
As per TRAI recommendation, any entity that holds this authorisation can provide mobile service, internet service, broadband service, landline telephone service, long distance service, satellite communication service, Machine to Machine (M2M) and internet of Things (IoT) service on a pan India basis. Furthermore, TRAI’s proposals include enabling satellite-based services to offer voice calling and messaging features, broadening the spectrum of services available within the telecom sector.
However, interestingly, the exclusion comes despite pressure from telecom companies like , Bharti Airtel and Vodafone Idea that wanted these platforms to be regulated in a similar fashion as the traditional telecom services. According to a report by Economic Times last month, the telcos asked TRAI to create licences or permissions for OTT (over-the-top) communication apps, arguing that they provide similar services to what mobile phone operators offer. Meanwhile, OTT apps opposed this, claiming that they are already regulated under the Information Technology Act.
Delhi High Court Restrains Businesses From Using Amul’s Trademark On Their Pharmaceutical Products, Directs Payment Of ₹5 Lakhs In Damages & Costs
The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction in favour of Amul, against businesses dealing in pharmaceutical products, from using ‘AMUL’ trademark on their products. The Court imposed costs and damages of Rs. 5 lakh against them for infringing Amul’s well-known trademark.
A single judge bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna observed that an ordinary customer is likely to be confused that the defendants have some association with Amul, thus giving them an unfair advantage and damaging the reputation of Amul’s trademark.
Background
The brief facts of the case are that Kaira District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd, popularly known as Amul (plaintiff no. 1) had permitted plaintiff no. 2 to market its products with the trademark ‘AMUL’ throughout the country.
The plaintiffs claimed that Bio Logic And Psychotropics India Private Ltd (defendant no. 1) engaged in the business of pharmaceutical tablets and that it used an antipsychotic medication under the mark ‘AMUL’. These tablets were sold on various e-commerce platforms.
When the plaintiffs served a legal notice to the defendants, asking them to ‘cease and desist’ from using the trademark, the defendants replied that they invented the trademark in 2013. The defendant no. 2 also filed a trademark application 8 days after receiving the legal notice, claiming to have been using the trademark ‘AMUL’ for its pharmaceutical products since 2013.
The plaintiffs thus sought a permanent and mandatory injunction against the defendant for infringing the trademark and making profits from it.
The Court stated that defendants have infringed Amul’s well-known trademark and that are not entitled to use the trademark ‘AMUL’ or any other mark which is deceptively similar to Amul. The Court opined that the defendants acted with a malafide intention by infringing Amul’s well-known and reputed trademark. It noted that the defendants cannot plead ignorance of the prior existence of Amul’s trademark or its reputation.
The Court restrained the defendants, their partners, proprietors, servants, agents, distributors, marketers and suppliers from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly, dealing in products or providing services that bear the ‘AMUL’ logo or any other deceptively similar mark.
On the issue of costs, the Court took into account the conduct of the defendants. Noting that the defendants knowingly infringed Amul’s trademark. It awarded costs of Rs. 4 lakhs and damages of Rs. 1 lakh to Amul, to be paid by the defendants within six months of the order.
Read order here.
Miley Cyrus sued for Grammy-winning song ‘Flowers’, accused of copying Bruno Mars’ popular track
Miley Cyrus is accused of copying a popular song by Bruno Mars for her song Flowers. It is known that Miley won her first Grammy award for the best pop solo performance for ‘Flowers’ this year. When this song was released last year, it remained at number 1 in the US for eight weeks. Not only this, it remained at the top position in the UK for 10 weeks.
A case has also been registered against Miley Cyrus in this matter. It is alleged that Miley and her co-writers have copied parts of Bruno Mars’ song ‘When I Was Your Man’ for the song Flowers. This song by Bruno was released in 2013. According to media reports, a company named Tempo Music Investments has filed a copyright infringement case against Miley.
Along with Miley, co-writers Gregory Hein and Michael Pollack have also been linked to the case. At the same time, many companies including Target, Walmart, Apple and Sony Music Publishing have been accused of distributing Miley’s song.
It has been said in this lawsuit that Bruno Mars fans know that ‘Flowers’ song has not achieved so much success alone. For this song, the chorus, melody and harmony of ‘When I Was Your Man’ have been copied. The company has demanded that Miley completely stop distributing ‘Flowers’ song and should not even perform to it.
Rampant Use Of ‘Cool Lip’ Tobacco Products By School Kids: Madras High Court Suo Motu Impleads Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare
The Madras High Court has impleaded the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, the Secretary to Government, School Education Department and the Commissioner of Food Safety and Drug Administration in Tamil Nadu in a plea dealing with rampant use of cool lip tobacco products amongst school kids in the State.
Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was hearing a bail petition filed by a man who was found in possession of 27 packets of cool lip tobacco products. He was thus charged for offences punishable under Section 123 of the BNS and Section 24 (1) of the Cigarette and other Tobacco Products Act 2003.
The court noted that of law, it was witnessing the seizure of a large quantity of cool lip products. The court also noted that in some videos, schoolchildren were seen using tobacco products which then led to them sitting in a dazed condition. The court noted that using these products would eventually lead to schoolchildren going further for Ganja and other narcotic substances.
The court also noted that though the State government had banned the product inside the state, huge quantities were still being smuggled into the state and was being sold. Thus, the court observed that the matter had to be inquired into in detail only after which the question of bail in cases of interstate sellers could be determined.
Read order here.
