Tanisha Rana
Published on: November 8, 2022 at 21:18 IST
The Indian National Congress party (INC) and its mass movement, Bharat Jodo Yatra, had their Twitter handles temporarily blocked by Twitter as part of a copyright infringement lawsuit, but the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday set aside that order.
However, a division bench of Justices G Narendar and PN Desai made it clear that the Congress party must delete the infringing tweets from all of its social media sites before the order tossing out the commercial court ruling will be implemented.
“Order impugned is set aside subject to the appellant (Congress party) removing content from all social media platforms,” the Court directed.
The decision was made after it was noted that the Congress party had earlier acknowledged that it had unintentionally tweeted illegal material and had promised to take it down.
In light of this, the bench noted that blocking the party’s Twitter account was not necessary.
“Shutting out.. it is punitive. You direct them to preserve the evidence, that is fine,” the Court remarked.
The Congress party informed the court that it would delete the offensive tweets by tomorrow before 2 o’clock.
It then went ahead and annulled the order of the commercial court.
“As of now the order is set aside, subject to their undertaking. Other interim applications will be reconsidered. We are not cutting it out,” the Court made it clear.
On Monday, the commercial court in Bengaluru issued an order mandating the temporary blocking of the Congress party’s and the Bharat Jodo Yatra’s Twitter accounts as well as the removal of three links from the social media site.
Judge Latha Kumari issued the ruling in a copyright infringement case brought by MRT Music (respondent/plaintiff), who claimed that the handles had improperly exploited the sound files from the film KGF-Chapter 2 in their work.
The commercial court had concluded that there was enough prima facie evidence to conclude that the plaintiff would suffer irreparable harm if the claimed unauthorised use of sound recordings was promoted, and that doing so would also encourage piracy more generally.
“Plaintiff has specifically produced CD showing the side by side file i.e., original version of his copyrighted work with that of the illegally synchronized version.”
“These prima facie materials available before this court at this stage establishes that if same is encouraged plaintiff who is in the business of acquiring cinematography films, songs, music albums etc., will be put to irreparable injury and further same leads to encouraging the piracy at large,” the Court had stated.
On Monday, MRT’s legal counsel argued that because the respondents were using their music unlawfully and violating their rights, it was necessary to appoint a Commissioner to conduct an electronic audit, look over INC’s Twitter account, Bharat Jodo Yatra’s Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, and Facebook accounts, and to preserve any infringing content.
The commercial court had concurred and ruled that if a commissioner was not appointed, the purpose of obtaining an injunction would be undermined.
In order to examine the defendants’ accounts, conduct an electronic audit, and save infringing materials so they could be inventoried, it had also appointed an administrator of its computer section as a local commissioner.
The Congress party then appealed the ruling to the Karnataka High Court using the present plea.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued on behalf of the Congress party that while the infringing Tweet in question can be deleted, the party’s entire Twitter account need not be done so.
“My Twitter handle cannot be taken off. There is no interest in that. They only want that 45 second clip should not be shown. That was a mistake.. it won’t be shown,” Singhvi said.
He said that the responders’ desire to have the full handle removed indicated that they had ulterior motives.
“Till further orders block the social media’. What media? The entire INC Twitter. It has no relevance for the respondent here unless he has some political axe to grind,” Singhvi submitted.
He also questioned why an ex-parte injunction needed to be passed so quickly without hearing the Congress party.
“Please note.. not a word in this order about any urgency that it could not give notice to me. It is mandatory to order notice unless you record emergent reason under Order 39 Rule 3. This has been interpreted recently,” Singhvi said.
Singhvi insisted that using the recording was a honest mistake and emphasised that they had no ulterior motives for profit.
Therefore, he argued, a disproportionate order that would shut down the party’s social media account should not be permitted.
“I have made a mistake but there is no commercial intent. That’s why I said, by tonight or tomorrow. your Lordships will not allow a disproportionate order the effect of which is to paralyse the social media expression of a leading political party,” he contended.
Due to poor audio quality, the arguments made by the respondent-plaintiff’s counsel were not audible.
The respondent was questioned by the court as to why the infringing tweets needed to be removed after the Congress party agreed to do so.
“They have admitted it…Why do you want access to their handle?” the Court queried.
The Court further questioned the necessity of appointing a commissioner to gain access to the Twitter account and carry out an investigation.
“Why should commissioner also have (access)? There is no dispute with respect to the fact that the audio has been synchronised of the video. Audio also includes the script.. once it is admitted, what’s the question of investigation,” the bench asked.