Industry updates: India
1. Competition Commission of India ("CCI") approves combination of mega players in the entertainment industry, involving, subject to the compliance of voluntary modifications
August 28, 2024: A proposed combination of the entertainment business players – Reliance Industries Limited ("RIL"), Viacom18 Media Private Limited ("Viacom18") which currently forms a part of the RIL group, Digital18 Media Limited, Star India Private Limited ("SIPL") (a wholly owned subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company ("TWDC")) and Star Television Productions Limited ("STPL") sparked competition law concerns. The combination would result in SIPL becoming a part of a joint venture (JV) held by RIL (including Viacom18) and other TWDC subsidiaries. The parties being engaged in the same product and geographic market, the JV was anticipated to have an appreciable adverse impact on the competition within the relevant market in India, specially owing to aggregation and monopolization of broadcasting rights. However, the CCI blessed the combination upon the condition that voluntary modifications would be implemented including broadcast feed of sports matches of 'national importance' with Prasar Bharti (except IPL), pricing caps for
Link here (Summary of the proposed transaction)
2. Disputes between Zee, Sony and BEPL on account of their failed merger laid to rest
August 27, 2024: ZEE Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. ("ZEE"), Culver Max Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. operating as Sony Pictures Networks India ("Sony") along with its group company Bangla Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. ("BEPL") (collectively "Parties"), issued a press release confirming an amicable and non-cash settlement of all disputes pertaining to their failed merger.
In 2021, ZEE and BEPL were in conversation with Sony for a proposed amalgamation including preferential allotment of certain shares by Sony to Essel Holdings Limited. However, the deal fell through due to failed negotiations and ongoing litigations between the Parties, as well as regulatory issues including interim order dated June 12, 2023 by Securities and Exchange Board of India barring Punit Goenka (CEO of ZEE) and Subash Chandra Goenka (Chairman of Essel group) from assuming management roles in any listed company due to allegations of fund misappropriation. Vide this Press Release, the Parties declared that they had mutually agreed to withdraw all claims against each other, in the ongoing arbitration at the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, and related legal proceedings in the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) amongst others.
3. Ministry of Information and Broadcasting constitutes a Monitoring Committee to oversee the implementation of Guidelines issued under Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 ("RPwD Act")
t 08, 2024: In exercise of its powers under the "Guidelines for Accessibility Standards in the Public Exhibition of Feature Films in Cinema Theatres for Persons with Hearing and Visual Impairment", ("Guidelines") issued on March 15, 2024 under RPwD Act, 2016, the MIB constituted a Monitoring Committee to oversee the implementation of the Guidelines pertaining to improve accessibility for persons with hearing and visual impairment to public exhibition of feature films. The Monitoring Committee is made responsible to ensure the deployment of assistive devices and other support for persons with disabilities to enjoy films in theatres and disseminate information pertaining to the same.
4. MIB issues Guidelines for Financial Assistance to Film Festivals
With the objective of establishing a transparent and standardized process for the allocation of financial assistance to film festivals and promote Indian cinema, the MIB issued the following Guidelines under Development, Communication and Dissemination of Filmic Content (DCDFC) Scheme: -
A. July 03, 2024: Guidelines for to Grants to Domestic Film Festivals
The Guidelines for Grant of Financial Assistance to Domestical Film Festivals were an initiative of the MIB to support the diverse landscape of Indian cinema. The Guidelines vest an exclusive discretion in the Central Govt. to extend financial grants and/ or marketing support to film festivals organized by the State Govt. or Flim School registered with the MIB, capped at 40% of the proposed budget or expenditure incurred in the last edition.
B. June 20, 2024: Guidelines for Financial Assistance to Indian Missions for Promotion of Indian Cinema
The MIB issued the Guidelines for Financial Assistance to Indian Missions affiliated to National Film Development Corporation (NFDC) and Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) to fund the organization of film festivals, subtitling and dubbing of films, promoting outreach of Indian media, hiring of media correspondents, setting up of Indian pavilion among others.
5. Enactment of Cinematograph (Adjudication of Penalty) Rules, 2024 ("Penalty Rules")
June 07, 2024: Under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 ("Cinematograph Act") which regulates the certification of cinematograph films and cinematographic exhibitions, the Penalty Rules were enacted to confer quasi-judicial powers upon authorized officers to investigate, report and take necessary action against violations of the Cinematograph Act.
II. Legal updates
1. MIB issued a direction regarding media coverage of sensitive content in the RG Kar rape case
September 13, 2024: MIB issued a direction to all private satellite TV channels, publishers of news and current affairs content on digital media and social media intermediaries to strictly comply with the order of the Supreme Court in respect of the content comprising the coverage of the RG Kar Medical College rape case.
On August 08, 2024, in the matter of WP (C) Diary No. 37158/2024- Kinnori Ghosh & Anr. v. UOI & Ors., the Supreme Court upheld the right of rape victims to keep their identity undisclosed and for the media and press to refrain from revealing their identity. The Hon'ble Court relied upon the provisions of Section 72(1) (disclosure of identity of victim of certain offences) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as well as a prior order passed by itself in 2019 and strictly directed the removal of all references to the name, pictures and clips of the deceased in the said rape case from all media reports and coverage.
III. Judgments
Supreme Court
1. Supreme Court grants interim relief to a journalist in a prosecution with respect to a tweet posted by him on the subject of caste bias in the UP administration
October 04, 2024: In a quashing petition under Section 482 of the CrPC, in the matter of Abhishek Upadhyay v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., the Supreme Court exercised its extraordinary jurisdiction and granted interim protection to journalist, Abhishek Upadhyay who was prosecuted for authoring a post on caste dynamics in appointments to the Uttar Pradesh administration on the social media platform X. Upholding the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, the Bench held that journalists cannot be prosecuted merely because their writings are perceived as criticism of the government.
2. Supreme Court Issues Guidelines for Portraying Persons with Disabilities in Visual Media
July 08, 2024: In a a special leave petition in the matter of Nipun Malhotra v. Sony Pictures Films India Private Limited & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 7230 of 2024, the Supreme Court issued guidelines to balance the fundamental right of a filmmaker to artistic expression along with the rights of the marginalized who are subjects of the relevant content. The petition challenged the portrayal of persons with disabilities in the film "Aankh Micholi" alleging that the fundamental rights of persons with disabilities were violated by the usage of insensitive/ derogatory language in the film. The petition not only claimed violation of the right to equality and without discrimination under the Indian Constitution but also a violation of the provisions of the RPwD Act, 2016. While the Apex Court refused to interfere with the certification granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), it took the opportunity to prescribe a framework for the visual portrayal of persons with disabilities in alignment with applicable law.
High Court
3. Rajasthan High Court lifts stay on the release of the movie 'Jigra'
October 10, 2024: The Jodhpur Commercial Court had issued an interim injunctive order against the release of the movie "Jigra" in a suit for trademark infringement by a person who claimed to have obtained a trademark in the said name and running online classes thereunder since September 2023. However, upon an appeal in Dharma Production Private Limited v. Bhallaram Choudhary (2024 D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2784/2024), a division bench of the Rajasthan High Court stayed the order of injunction (vide an ad-interim stay) and permitted the release of the film stating that no case of infringement was made out as the trademark was registered by the respondent in a different class and irreparable loss owing to the usage of the word in the movie could not be established. Though the Respondent had filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court challenging the order of the Rajasthan High Court, the same was withdrawn on 18th October, 2024.
Link here (attaching orders separately)
4. Kerala High Court sets aside copyright infringement against a man selling cassettes on the footpath
October 04, 2024: In the matter of O.P. Ashraf v. The State of Kerala (Crl.R.P.No.866 of 2012) a case of copyright infringement was filed against a man allegedly selling fake audio cassettes on the footpath. The Kerela High Court set aside the prosecution on the grounds that the ingredients of infringement under the Copyright Act, 1957 ("Act") were not fulfilled since it could not be ascertained as to who the copyright owner was or whether any license was granted or whether there was any exclusivity to the copyright ownership. The Court observed that for an offence under Section 52A of the Act to be made out, it was imperative to prove that the accused had published a sound recording without displaying the name and address of the person who has made the sound recording, name and address of owner of copyright and the year of its first publication. Since these constituents could not be proved, the conviction was held to be unreasonable and set aside.
Link here (attaching order separately)
5. Karnataka High Court passes a restraining order on streaming live court proceedings on social media
September 24, 2024: The Karnataka High Court in Advocates Association Bengaluru vs. Union of India (WP 26300 of 2024), passed an interim restraining order against social media platforms from live-streaming court proceedings and directed them to remove any such content which was in violation of Rule 10 of the Karnataka Rules on Live Streaming and Recording of Court Proceedings, 2021.
6. Delhi High Court issues dynamic injunction to leading global entertainment companies to protect their copyrighted works
August 30, 2024: In the wake of the increasing menace of piracy in content, global entertainment players including Warner Bros, Netflix, Disney, Columbia amongst others ("Plaintiffs") recently filed a class action in the matter of Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. & Ors. V. Moviesmod.bet & Ors. CS (COMM)/738/2024, against 45 rogue websites allegedly hosting and streaming the plaintiffs' copyrighted works in various movies and shows without a license. The Delhi High Court passed a dynamic injunction to restrain the infringement of the Plaintiffs' rights in the subject works. The Court took note of the prima facie and flagrant infringement of the Plaintiffs' copyright by the presence of vast volumes of content on the Defendants' websites, regularity and consistency of uploads, inaction to legal notices, and disregard of the fact that third party websites are unauthorized to distribute the copyrighted material. The matter is now listed for January 13, 2025.
The European Commission in its Communication to the European Parliament dated November 29, 2017 defined dynamic injunctions as "...injunctions which can be issued for instance in cases in which materially the same website becomes available immediately after issuing the injunction with a different IP address or URL and which is drafted in a way that allows to also cover the new IP address or URL without the need for a new judicial procedure to obtain a new injunction."
Link here (attaching the order)
Link here (European Communication)
7. Calcutta High court refuses to issue gag order against media houses
August 21, 2024: The coverage of the recent brutal rape and murder case that took place in Calcutta's RG Kar Medical College has been the subject of several debates. We have captured a directive by the MIB in the Industry Updates segment hereinabove. In connection with the incident, the ex-principal of the college filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court in Sandip Ghosh v. Union of India (2024 SCC OnLine 7734) seeking a restraining order against intermediaries and media houses from publishing allegedly unreal and defamatory news about his involvement in the matter. The said petition was denied by the Calcutta High Court in the absence of specific factual connections of the news resulting in an alleged media trial and upheld the duty of the media to keep the public updated in matters of national importance and the consequent right to information of the public in this regard. The Court concluded by stating that the Petitioners had remedies available under the Press Council Act, 1978 as well as the Ethics Code of 2021 or the law of defamation. However, importance of free speech and public's right to information aligning with the role of intermediaries disseminating public information through freedom of press had to be upheld.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
