The statement that the “creative type” of The Delhi High Court said satire should be “encouraged and protected”. on Friday that ‘right in comment on content created on social media or TV channels also It must be recognized as faces of The right to freedom of speech and expression.
Refusal to grant temporary relief to TV Today in that it plea against online news portal New Zealand, the court said it would be ” in interest of The public Every broadcaster has the right of free businees comment on current events And the of cash and reviewIncluding of programs created by others.
TV Today Network who owns news channels like Aaj Tak and India Today filed a lawsuit against New Zealand and its employees for Allegedly smearing reputation through its programmes. I asked for Alleged defamation and commercial disparagement content to be removed From website. had a also accused online portal of infringement of Copyrights content.
big advocate Saurabh Kirpal, representing Newsla Laundry, argued that online portal He was raising ‘defence of Truth and fair criticism even in harsh words, no amount for defamatory statements. It was ironic flavor of The portal software, he said.
Hold those threatening opinions national Security, law and order and at first sight false, defamatory, derogatory or pejorative in content or offer possible Exceptions to the right to freedom of expression of The court said: Other than that ability To express an opinion should be freely available for All who express an opinion.”
Judge Asha Menon said, comment on verb of The reports themselves will be covered under ‘Cash’ or ‘Cash.reviewPursuant to Sections 52 and 39 of Copyright law will be protected against the allegations of infringement. “But, that would be a question of fact Whether the reproduction, allegedly infringing, is protected by section 39 and/or section 52 of The act is actually in The nature of review and criticism,” the court said.
The court said although the license will be required From the owners to reproduce it broadcast contentThere are exceptions provided by law. “Excerpt of a broadcast can rebroadcast if it use consistent with “fair dealing” and in respect of Reports of current events or for good well review or teaching or research. The broadcast Reproduction right will not be infringed even on the account of repeat-broadcast with Any necessary modifications and modifications do not constitute a breach of Copyright under section 52″.
“Defence,” said Judge Menon of truth” Will be available as an absolute defense for plea of Defamation or defamation is proven during trial. While Newsla Laundry has argued that the unrestricted right to comment on each other content will direct media In communication and publishing information Correctly, the court said it could not accept “self-appointment” by Newsla Laundry and its staff as a “regulator” of media content.
Taking into account that the system or self-regulatory The mechanisms are there for remedy of grievances related to news And the social media ContentThe court said: “No individual or organization can claim the authority to regulate – chaos can be imagined – there will only be regulators and no one willing to abide by the regulations.”
On network TV today, Newsla Laundry allegedly filmed her in Poor lightThe court said the trial judge should determine whether the comments and programs were “fair.” commentThis determination can only be made after the conclusion of The trial said.
On the argument of Newslandy that its location content It is satire, the court said portal No explanation needed of Her programs are “satirical” and she “commentHowever, it also He said satire should be “encouraged and protected”.
the news | Click to get today best commentators in your inbox
“Cynics at all times in Our culture is highly respected and there are many of them art Forms in This is the country that allowed such criticism of Even the rulers in Peak days of Ownership and what art The shapes are still there. Examples that come to mind are “Ottamthulal” and “Chakyar Koothu”, both in Kerala state. sharp use of language It conveys the message the artists intended, but in In an educated and meticulous manner. “This kind of creativity should undoubtedly be encouraged and protected,” said Justice Menon.
Judge Menon said while some of The portal’s content was at first glance defamatory or insulting of Software of Network TV Today, others appeared with criticism and opinion. The revelation of the prima facie case is undeniable but that alone will not entitle TV Today to a temporary injunction where the defendants must be given a chance prove their defense of Justification and fair dealing during the trial, the court said.
“Contents of individual videos, articlesFacebook and Instagram posts must be considered individually to determine whether they contain malicious, dishonest, defamatory, offensive statements or constitute truthfulness and possible sarcastic opinion. In short, the decision It should be postponed until after the conclusion of The court said while ordering existing of status before roster bench.