Delhi High Court grants injunction against rogue websites peddling false articles on Anant Ambani Interview with CNBC-TV18

Educator

New member


Delhi High Court: A suit was filed by Network18 Media & Investments Limited (plaintiff seeking inter-alia permanent injunction restraining the infringement of their intellectual property rights i.e., copyright in cinematograph film (the video of an interview), trademarks as well as personality rights- which are being infringed by various rogue websites (Defendant No.1-8 working/operating in conjunction with Defendant No. 9 and 10). Sanjeev Narula, J., restrained defendants 1-8 from infringing Plaintiff No. 1 and 2’s TV18 marks and copyright in plaintiff 6’s interview and passing off Plaintiff No. 1 and 2’s mark as well as violating Plaintiff No.6’s personality rights in plaintiff 6’s interview.

The plaintiffs in this case, Network18 Media & Investments Limited (“Network18”), its subsidiary TV18 Broadcast Limited, and Mr. Anand Narasimhan (plaintiff 6), a senior anchor and Managing Editor at CNN-News18, sought a permanent injunction to restrain the infringement of their intellectual property rights. Network18, a diversified media conglomerate, and TV18 Broadcast Limited, primarily engaged in news broadcasting, alleged that various rogue websites (Defendant Nos. 1-8) in conjunction with Defendant Nos. 9 and 10, were infringing their rights including copyrights, trademarks, and personality rights.

The dispute arose from an unauthorized use of content from an interview conducted by Mr. Anand Narasimhan with Mr. Anant Mukesh Ambani, Director of Reliance Industries Ltd. The interview, which was broadcast on the CNBC TV18 YouTube channel on 26-02-2024, had garnered over 367,000 views. Defendants Nos. 1-8 published a false article titled “CNBC-TV18 management refuses to comment on the scandal surrounding its interview ‘Vantara (star of the forest)'”, misrepresenting the actual interview and redirecting users to a fraudulent cryptocurrency trading platform called Everix Edge (Defendant 9). The article falsely claimed that Mr. Ambani endorsed Everix Edge, suggesting users could achieve a 4,000% return on investment within months. To lend credibility, it was deceitfully presented as being published by the BBC.

The plaintiffs argued that their intellectual property rights were being infringed by the defendants. They claimed exclusive rights to the interview under Section of the , asserting the right to make copies of the cinematograph film and its photographs. They also alleged that the defendants were passing off their trademarks by using marks deceptively similar to the TV18 marks. Additionally, the false article was defamatory, violating the personality rights of Mr. Anand Narasimhan by using his likeness and image without authorization. Defendants Nos. 11 and 12 (Meta Platforms Inc. and X Corp.) were implicated for hosting posts that shared URLs to the infringing articles. Defendants Nos. 13-18, including various domain name registrars and government departments, were called upon to block and take down the infringing websites and provide the KYC details of the registrants.

The Court observed that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case of infringement of their intellectual property rights. The court noted that the defendants were infringing the plaintiffs’ trademarks and the false article violated Mr. Narasimhan’s personality rights.

Considering the urgency and potential for further harm, the court granted interim relief to the plaintiffs, directing the owners of Defendants Nos. 1-8 to cease infringing activities and refrain from using the plaintiffs’ trademarks and copyrighted material. Domain name registrars (Defendants Nos. 13-18) were instructed to block access to the infringing websites and provide KYC details of the registrants to facilitate further investigation. Meta Platforms Inc. and X Corp. were ordered to remove posts linking to the infringing articles and provide user details to aid in identifying the perpetrators. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Department of Telecommunications were directed to instruct telecom and internet service providers to block the infringing websites.

[Network 18 Media and Investments Limited v , CS(COMM) 449/2024, decided on 28-05-2024]



Advocates who appeared in this case :

Mr. SaiKrishna Rajagopal, Advocate for plaintiff

Mr. Tejas Karia, Advocate with Mr. Varun Pathak, Mr. Yash Karunakarun, Ms. Adya Joshi and Ms. Arunima Srivastava, Advocates for Defendant No. 11. Ms. Mrinal Ojha, Advocate with Ms. Debarshi Datta and Ms. Tanya Chaudhury, Advocates for Defendant No. 16.

The post appeared first on .
 
Top
AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock