The Delhi High Court has ordered internet behemoth Google to restrict or remove from YouTube specific “defamatory” videos that claimed that Indian spices contain cow dung and pee and targeted prominent companies like “Catch.” The top court declared that it was persuaded that the defendants’ development and uploading of such movies is a “deliberate attempt to defame and disparage” the plaintiff’s products that bear the “Catch” mark. “A review of the comments on the aforementioned YouTube videos reveals that the general public is being swayed and encouraged to believe such misleading allegations, seriously harming the Plaintiff (Dharampal Satyapal Sons).
Given the simple and open access, there is a good chance that many unaware members of the public may distribute or view the defamatory recordings, according to Justice Sanjeev Narula. Due to their absence from the proceedings, the court proceeded ex parte against the two defendants who are accused of uploading the films.
“Google Takes Action and Removes Defamatory Videos of Indian Spices from TYR and Views NNews Channels”
Google’s legal representative informed the court that, in accordance with its earlier instructions, action was taken and the three videos were removed from public view. The two defendant channels, TYR and Views NNews, were accused by the high court of maliciously uploading the films that made disparaging and false claims about Indian spices, notably those marketed under the plaintiff’s “Catch” brand. “Their malafide is further manifested by their inaction in removing the infringing content from YouTube after the plaintiff had raised a complaint, which was duly acknowledged by defendant no. 2,” the statement continued. The high court’s decision was indeed the result of a lawsuit filed by the plaintiff, who sought a permanent injunction barring libel and slander against the company’s goods that were created and marketed under the registered trademark “CATCH.”
“Indian Spice Business Wins Legal Battle Against Defamatory Videos Uploaded on YouTube”
The business said it had a sizable customer base, produces spices with exquisite flavours and smells, upholds the highest standards of hygienic practices, and regularly inspects the quality of its goods. It approached the court after learning about the videos that allegedly claimed that all Indian spices contained cow dung and urine and that they specifically targeted big spice-trading businesses, including its own brand. In fact, The plaintiff claimed that the videos had a voiceover that made false and derogatory claims about its goods. Moreover, The high court ruled in favour of the plaintiff and against the two defendant channels, finding that the films make unjustified derogatory statements about the plaintiff’s products.
“Indian spice brand wins lawsuit against defamatory videos; court mandates takedown and blocks against further dissemination”
“Plaintiff has filed a list of the components in its goods and spices featured in the contested films. “As claimed in the challenged videos, they have obtained certifications from all relevant regulatory bodies and even presented reports of an independent food analysis from a certified laboratory, which do not indicate the presence of cow dung, cow urine, or any other contaminants,” it stated.
It was further stated that there was “no authoritative material, underlying reason, or assumption for the two defendants to make false claims and disseminate false information under the pretence of disclosing the ‘truth/facts about Indian spices.'”It is mandated that in the event that the contested films 1, 2, and 3 reappear on Defendant No. 1’s YouTube platform, Plaintiff shall be free to provide Defendant No. 1 (Google) with the relevant URLs, and the latter shall take the necessary steps to block or take down the same in line with the law. However, the court stated that if defendant No. 1 determines that the content is different from the injuncted videos, they must notify the plaintiff of this within a week of receiving the request and the plaintiff will then be free to pursue any legal remedies that may be available to him.
Other Legal News and Posts
- Defamation
- Social media companies removed 50-65% content as per our request: Tamil Nadu government
- Remove bunds blocking flow of water into Yamuna: Delhi HC to Haryana
- Plaintiff does not need to undergo ‘Second AgniPariksha’ according to Malicious prosecution: Madras HC
- Indian Courts and Jurisdiction: How to find a suitable court?
