Calcutta HC Orders YouTube, Social Media Platforms To Block Dhruv Rathee Video On Real Fruit Juice

The Calcutta High Court recently ordered YouTube and other social media platforms to take down or block public access to a video of popular content creator Dhruv Rathee in which he has “denigrated and targeted” Dabur India’s Real fruit juice.

Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur noted that in his video, Rathee crossed the “Lakshman rekha” and targeted Real by comparing it with fresh fruit juices and showing how it affects the health and hair growth of people, especially children.

The judge noted that the video in question makes a clear & brazen reference to Real and uses slides from an earlier advertisement that had been aired by Dabur.

The judge said in its order dated on March 15 that “The product of the petitioner Real has been repeatedly targeted both overtly and covertly in the impugned video. Any consumer would understand that the product shown in the impugned video is that of the petitioner’s product Real. Prima facie, at the ad interim stage, even though the underlying intent of the impugned video may not be objectionable, in making repeated direct and brazen references to the product Real of the petitioner, the Lakshman Rekha or the Rubicon has been crossed.”

The Bench on March 15 had ordered Rathee to remove the relevant part from the video. It said that Rathee, in publishing and circulating the video, also contravened the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, of 1999 and the Copyright Act, of 1957.

“The unauthorized use of the packaging, label, and logo of the product Real in the impugned video violates the trademark and copyright protection afforded to the petitioner and is impermissible. In my view, the petitioner’s product Real has been specifically targeted, denigrated and discredited in the impugned video.”

However, on a subsequent hearing held on March 24, it was informed that the video continues to be aired on his channel.

The Court observed in the latter order that “It is the plain and unqualified obligation of any person against or in respect of whom an order is made by a Court to obey the same unless and until the order has been set aside, modified or varied. The uncompromising nature of this obligation is fundamental to the Rule of Law.”

Noting that there has been no compliance with the order passed on March 15, the Court said,
“In view of the incalculable damage which the impugned video may have, in my view, the balance of convenience and irreparable injury is overwhelmingly in favor of further orders being passed. Against this backdrop, the respondents are directed to take down/remove/block and restrain access to the impugned video from all the URL/Web Links.”

The matter will be next heard on March 30.

Senior Advocate Sudipta Sarkar with Advocates Debnath Ghosh, Sudhakar Prasad, Pradipta Bose, and Biswarup Mukherjee appeared for Rathee. Senior Advocate Utpal Bose along with Advocate Phiroze Edulji represented YouTube. Advocate Sakabda Roy represented Meta India.