){kind=link}
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday summoned American video sharing and social networking platform Triller on a copyright infringement suit filed by Indian production house Yash Raj Films (YRF).
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Amit Bansal further issued notice on the interim relief application filed by YRF, seeking to restrain Triller from allowing infringement of its copyright material.
The High Court fixed February 2 as the next date of hearing in the case.
The Counsel representing Triller contended that the dispute between the Indian production house and the social media company has been going on for some time and that he would take instructions from the company in the matter.
Stating that Triller has not turned a blind eye to the problem, the Counsel said that the company continuously removed the copyrighted material.
Advocates Abhishek Malhotra and Shilpa Gamnani of TMT Law Practise, appearing for YRF, argued that Triller has an extraction tool, which made available Yashraj’s works to users for uploading of audio-visual content/short videos.
YRF alleged that the defendant had illegally uploaded, stored, reproduced, made copies, created new works embodying the Plaintiff’s works.
The social media company further commercially exploited, communicated to the public, made a sound recording in respect of the Plaintiff’s works, adapted, modified, synchronised and/or otherwise exploited or permitted the aforesaid acts by users of the Impugned Platforms, without a valid licence from the Plaintiff, added the Counsels appearing for YRF.
The Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant was making Yashraj’s works available to its users, and actively engaging in and assisting the infringement of their valuable rights without procuring any licence or authorisation.
The suit by YRF alleged that in order to continue its infringing activity, Triller had relied on the ‘safe-harbour’ protection guaranteed to intermediaries under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (a US enactment), besides the Information Technology Act, 2000.
As per the Plaintiff, several Cease & Desist Notices have been sent to the Defendant in the past, some of which have been responded to.
The suit further stated that though some links indicated in the notices were taken down, Triller failed to comply with its takedown obligation effectively and several of the links still remained active and/or continued to resurface repetitively.
The Counsels representing the YRF said that the impugned platforms contained various features, such as the audio extraction feature, which were beyond the limited role of an intermediary specified under Section 79 (2)(a) of the IT Act, thereby disentitling Triller from the ’safe-harbour’ protection guaranteed to intermediaries under the IT Act.
(Case title: Yashraj Films Private Limited v Triller Inc)