The Delhi High Court has recently ordered Google to take down videos on the YouTube channels which targeted several brands, including ‘Catch Foods’ by claiming that all Indian spices contain cow urine and cow dung.
Justice Sanjeev Narula restricted 2 YouTube channels from defaming & violating the copyright of conglomerate Dharampal Satyapal Sons Pvt Ltd’s that owns products under the brand name ‘Catch’.
The suit was filed by the association after it found that there are offending videos on the YouTube channels.
Based on documents produced by the plaintiff, the Court noted that the videos contained derogatory remarks without any basis.
The Court said that, “The impugned videos contain defamatory remarks against Plaintiff’s products, without any basis. Plaintiff has placed on record a list of ingredients contained in their products/ spices advertised in the impugned videos. They have obtained certifications from all concerned regulatory bodies and have even presented reports of an independent food analysis from a certified laboratory, which do not indicate presence of cow dung, cow urine or any other contaminants, as alleged in the impugned videos.”
Previously, Google was directed to disable access to the videos, and furnish the information of the basic subscriber information.
Subsequently, summons was issued to the several channels. However, they failed to appear and the Court decided to proceed ex-parte.
Therefore, the plaintiff pressed for summary judgment that brought to court’s attention Rule 4(4) of the IT, Rules, 2021, which directs the additional due diligence observation by social media intermediates in case where such content is uploaded/streamed online.
After taking the view that the videos contained defamatory remarks without any basis, it observed that there was no reliable material or any underlying reason for the defendants to make such false claims and disseminate fallacious information under the garb of divulging the ‘truth’ or ‘facts’ about the Indian spices.
Further, the Court observed that mala fide was indicated by the inactions of the defendants in removing the infringing content despite the plaintiff that raised a complaint, which also acknowledged by one of the defendants.
Hence, the Court decreed the suit against the defendants.
Also, it directed that the plaintiff could provide the URLs to Google, which has to take necessary action to ensure that they are taken down.
The Court clarified that if the content was not identical, Google could inform the plaintiff of the same within a week after which the plaintiff can take necessary action as per law.
