Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, Meta Over Copyright Extortion Plea

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought responses from the Centre, the Delhi government and Meta Platforms on a public interest litigation (PIL) alleging that Instagram's copyright enforcement mechanism is being exploited by organised cyber criminals to extort money from digital content creators.

A Division Bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora also directed petitioner Nitin Joshi, a digital content creator, to electronically submit his grievance to Meta within a week, as per Bar and Bench.

The Court asked the company to examine the complaint and take an appropriate decision.

During the hearing, the Bench observed that the matter appeared to go beyond a routine copyright dispute. "This is a larger issue. He (petitioner) has raised an issue regarding cyber crime and digital extortion," the Court was quoted as saying by Bar and Bench.

Petitioner Alleges Organised Extortion Racket

The PIL alleged that cyber criminals manipulate Meta's copyright complaint process by editing old posts with newly created content from original creators before filing copyright claims.

The resulting copyright strikes can lead to suspension of creators' accounts, after which the complainants allegedly demand lakhs of rupees to withdraw the complaints.

The petition sought the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT), mandatory human review before permanent action on copyright complaints, restoration of wrongly suspended accounts, disclosure of complainants' identities and a fast-track grievance mechanism for cases involving alleged extortion.

It also challenged certain provisions of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, appearing for Meta, argued that the PIL was not maintainable, saying the IT Rules already provide a statutory grievance mechanism, as per Bar and Bench.

He maintained that the issue related to alleged misuse of the platform by third parties rather than shortcomings in Meta's copyright system.

"He is saying your (Meta's) platform is defective and somebody is using it to create copyright problems. These are fact-driven questions. It can't be a PIL. I am saying file an application to the grievance officer," Datar submitted.

"Any mechanism there will be rogue players. It can’t be helped. This platform is worldwide, it is not only for India. If he comes we will immediately take down, we will also have to give him [rogue persons] an opportunity. Then we will take down. There is also a grievance appellate mechanism," he added.

Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Tejbir Singh said the challenge was not to Meta's copyright framework itself but to its alleged misuse for cyber extortion.

According to Bar and Bench, Joshi also told the Court: "I made a video to raise awareness on this issue, then it gets taken down. It is not just extortion. There is a criminal angle on this, probably Bangladesh. That is why we are seeking police investigation. Meta is aware of this and they are solving it for individual cases. A big media house faces the same issue."

Meta's counsel Varun Pathak acknowledged that automated copyright tools were not flawless, stating, "Under the IT Rules we have automated tools to protect copyrights. It is not a perfect mechanism."

"Only 5-7 cases have come to the court. The bad actors somehow have access and are negotiating with them. Our difficulty is that they don't invoke the grievance mechanism. No system is perfect. If it was invoked it would be solved," he added.

According to Bar and Bench, the High Court issued notices to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, the Ministry of Home Affairs and the Delhi government.

It also clarified that other content creators cited by the petitioner would need to pursue their own remedies separately. The matter has been listed for hearing on September 21.