Explore

In fact, not only was a case filed by them but also by their parent company, Facebook. The two petitions are substantively similar - they challenge the traceability provision of Rule 4(2) under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021Rules. These rules are the latest rules to be issued under the parent legislation of India's Information Technology Act. Under the new Rules, Whatsapp is directly under threat since it comes under the ambit of a signficant social media intermediary. A social media intermediary is defined as one that "primarily or solely enables online interaction between two or more users and allows them to create, upload, share, disseminate, modify or access information using its services." A signficant one being those intermediaries that have more...

In February 2021, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology released the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (hereafter, ‘the Rules’). The Rules drastically altered the intermediary liability regime in India and superseded/replaced the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011. The 2021 Rules are significantly broader than the Draft Intermediary Rules, 2018 as they regulate online intermediaries, as well as digital news organisations and OTT video streaming. The Rules are being criticised by civil society, policy organisations, and digital news organisations for, amongst other things, being overbroad and withering away digital freedoms including the freedom of expression and the right to privacy online. The Constitutionality of the...

On January 31, 2020, the High Court of Delhi struck down an injunction that had restrained several e-commerce platforms, including Amazon, from selling products of Amway, Oriflame and Modivare without their consent. The Court held that the "Direct Selling Guidelines of 2016" were purely advisory in nature and did not qualify as law. The Court also refused to distinguish between passive and active intermediaries in regard to the applicability of the safe harbor provisions under India’s IT Act. Facts of the Case In July 2019, a single bench judge of the High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Amway and other entities regarding the unauthorized sale of their products on e-commerce platforms. Such judge held that the Direct Selling Guidelines of 2016 (DSGs) were fully binding in nature. He also held that the...

Note: This case originated in July 2008 and is based on the Intermediary Liability framework prior to the 2008 Amendment to the Information Technology Act, 2000. The 2008 Amendment had granted safe harbour protection to intermediaries under Section 79 of the Act. Thus, the findings of intermediary liability are applicable only to cases where the cause of action arose prior to December 2008. On December 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of India declined to quash defamation proceedings against Google for its failure to expeditiously remove a defamatory article against the defendant from its Google Group service. The case is significant since it holds that in cases that originated prior to December 2008, intermediaries may be liable as ‘publishers’ in defamation proceedings under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The...

On October 23, 2019, the High Court of Delhi issued an order whereby it affirmed that Indian courts can issue global take down orders to Internet intermediaries like Facebook, Google and Twitter for illegal content uploaded from IP addresses within India. Facts of the Case The case involves content in the form of videos about the book on Swami Ramdev (popularly known as Baba Ramdev) titled “Godman to Tycoon – The Untold Story of Baba Ramdev” by Priyanka Pathak Narain. Such book had been previously restrained from being published by the Delhi High Court which held that it contained prima-facie defamatory content on Baba Ramdev. The petitioners, Baba Ramdev and Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., asked the court to issue a global take down order for the defamatory content in question to Facebook, Google, YouTube, Twitter and other...

On October 23, 2019, the Delhi High Court issued an injunction against Facebook, Google, YouTube and Twitter (Defendants) and other online intermediaries, directing them to globally take down a list of URLs from their platforms which were allegedly defamatory to the Plaintiffs. The case was brought by yoga guru Swami Ramdev in relation to an alleged defamatory video and related content posted and disseminated on the Defendants’ platforms. The impugned content summarized the contents of a book which had been found to be defamatory by another court. After a detailed analysis of the law on intermediary liability in India under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Information Technology Rules, 2011, the Court held that the intermediaries were obliged to take down and block all such illegal content and videos which...