Broadcasting means- dissemination of info to public at large
Modes of broadcasting/ types of broadcasting media- tv , radio, newspaper,
magazines
Doordarshan- technological development-
Channels- entertainment and news reporting
Article 19 protected--- The broadcasting- Article 19 - the right to speech and
expression which includes right to publication and circulation of one’s own
views in the public with certain restrictions which are provided in the Article
19(2).
circulation and distribution of news and views directly into the public at
large, it may be dangerous to safety and security of nation as well as public
morality-- any obscene and scandalous statement will affect the peace and
security of the state or society, so that it must be regulated and controlled over
broadcasting media.
Increase in large number of competition need regulatory law to save from the
unauthorized and unlawful use of media
Example- 26/11 attack of Mumbai at hotel Taj. During that attack, media
broadcast live coverage of every action of the Indian defense side and live
movement of Taj which in turn helped the terrorist to known every plan of the
Government which posed threat to security of State.
Top of the hierarchy of control of the broadcasting media is the Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting, which regulates the broadcasting through
various rules and regulations
The Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 – regulate cable operators
Prasar Bharti for broadcasting and censer board to regulate motion picture in
India, under which there are many organizations which control broadcasting
media in regional levels
Broadcasting Content Compliant Council (BCCC) under control of Indian
Broadcasting Federation (IBF).-- control broadcaster from unauthorised and
uncensored broadcasting--- This authority receives the complaints from the
people against uncensored seen on television network and punishes to those
TV channels who violet the rule
1. STAR INDIA PVT LTD & ANR. v. YODESI SERIAL.SU & ORS 2023
The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained 50 rogue websites from illegally
streaming various television shows, TV series and movies broadcasted on OTT
platform Disney plus Hotstar.
Justice C Hari Shankar observed that prima facie, exclusive rights to stream or telecast
the content contained in the 26 shows and films vests in the platform-hotstar and not
others.
The court was hearing a suit moved by Star India Private Limited and Disney Plus
Hotstar against the rogue websites alleging that they were engaged in piracy of their
copyrighted content.
(The 26 shows and films are Yeh Rishta Kya Kehlaata Hai, Ghum Hai Kisi Ke Pyaar
Meiin, Anupamaa, Yeh Hai Chahatein, Imlie, Saath Nibhaana Saathiya 2, Aapki
Nazron Ne Samjha, Pandya Store, Mehndi Hai Rachne Waali, Zindagi Mere Ghar
Aana, Yeh Rishtey Hain Pyaar Ke, Ek Hazaroon Mein Meri Behna Hai, Lakshmi Ghar
Aayi, Mann Ki Awaaz Pratigya 2, RadhaKrishn - Punar Milan, City of Dreams (2
Seasons), Grahan, November Story, Ok Computer, 1232 Kms, Live Telecast, Triples,
Hundred, Special Ops, Roar of the Lion and 1962: War in the Hills.)
The court in August 2021 had passed an ad interim injunction order against the rogue
websites. None of the defendants were represented through a counsel in the
proceedings. While decreeing the suit, Justice Shankar said that “it is but natural” that
the defendants being rouge entities, who are involved only in the business of
unauthorised broadcasting of television shows, films and web series in which others
hold copyright, have chosen not to appear before the court.
“This is not a singular phenomenon. It is observed by this Court in several matters
where such rouge websites surface, that they do not turn up to contest the suit. Their
prevailing philosophy appears to be to make hay while the sun shines,” the court said.
2. RED CHILLIES ENTERTAINMENTS PVT LTD v. ASHOK KUMAR/JOHN DOE
& ORS 2023 Del HC
The Delhi High Court has directed Meta and Telegram to suspend or deactivate the
groups and channels illegally circulated content of latest film Jawan starring
Bollywood actor Shahrukh Khan.
Justice C Hari Shankar also directed the two platforms to provide the basic subscriber
information and other details relating to the administrators of the groups or channels.
“The owners/controllers of the websites identified in Schedule “D” are directed
forthwith to desist from unauthorised copying, transmission, communication or
making available any content in which the plaintiff holds copyright including content
relating to the cinematographic film “Jawan” or any part thereof,” the court said.
The court passed the order in the suit filed by Red Chillies Entertainments Private
Limited against various rogue websites and other social media platforms seeking to
restrain them from committing any infringement in relation to its copyright in the
film.
…………………
A fresh application was moved by Red Chillies Entertainments against one Rohit
Sharma alleging that he was circulating, without authorisation, copyrighted content
relating to the film. The court restrained Sharma from copying, recording,
reproducing or transmitting any stills, audio/video clips, songs or recordings of the
movie without proper license from Red Chillies Entertainments.
“Mr. Rohit Sharma is additionally directed to take down from all his social media
accounts including WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram and Telegram or any other
website accessed or operated by him, any content which infringes the copyright of the
plaintiff including content relating to the film “Jawan”,” the court said.
Furthermore, Justice Shankar also directed Meta to forthwith suspend Sharma’s
WhatsApp account and block access to any content on his Facebook page titled “Rohit
movies” as well as the Instagram handle.
The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a PIL seeking directions for evolving and
enforcing the Code of Ethics/Regulations on the TV News Channels for reporting
news articles of "sensitive nature" including reporting of mass scale deaths, sufferings
by the people in the wake of second Covid wave and to restrain the broadcasters or
TV channels from spreading negativity, sense of insecurity towards life, alarm, injury,
harm, suffering, damage, etc. while doing so.
A division bench comprising of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jasmeet Singh
dismissed the PIL after observing that informing public about the number of covid
deaths is not negative news.
The PIL, filed by Lalit Valecha and moved through Advocates RK Gossain & Sadaf
Iliyas Khan, highlights that in wake of the second Covid wave, the news channels and
media has continued to air "negative images/visuals/stories in the most irresponsible
manner".
"It is a fact that TV news channels are airing news bulletins 24x7and most of the times
such news bulletins are repeat telecast. Although the same negative
images/visuals/stories are shown in the repeat programs, but it gives an impression
as if new/fresh incidents are occurring every now and then. In the present-day
scenario, in view of the fact that the people are confined indoors, people do watch the
news channel time and again." The plea states.
Stressing that such reports are watched by all and sundry including the children, old,
sick & critically sick, infirm persons, the petition further provides thus:
"That balancing the freedom of the press with putting in place checks and balances
that seek to instill a sense of responsibility and to prevent abuse of this freedom,
without the "chilling effect" that would impair journalistic freedomis a big challenge.
It is the duty of media to keep the citizenry informed of the state of governance with
adequate and appropriate checks and safeguards, specific to the electronic media that
can define the path that would conform to the highest standards of rectitude and guide
the media in the discharge of its solemn constitutional duty."
3. A petition was filed in Supreme court seeking Issuance of a writ, order or
direction in the nature of Mandamus, thereby, directing Union of India to frame
guidelines in a time bound manner for airing of news articles of sensitive nature such
as reporting of mass scale deaths, sufferings by the people, etc. by the
broadcasters/TV channels and restraining the broadcasters/TV channels from
spreading negativity, sense of insecurity towards life, alarm, injury, harm, suffering,
damage, etc.;
It is necessary that News channels recognize that they have a special responsibility in
the matter of adhering to high standards, obligations and morals of reporting,
journalism and airing of the news since they have the most potent influence on the
public at large viewers.
That TV Channels must ensure that by airing such negative images/visuals/stories,
they do not indulge in glorification. The news article should be aired with the objective
to incite positivity amongst the citizens and public at large/viewers. It is necessary
that adequate precautions are taken while showing any visual instance of pain, fear
or suffering, and visuals or details of self-harm of any kind, so that they do not cross
boundaries of good taste and decency and cause no harm to the public at large.
4. A PIL has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking constitution of an
independent authority, the Broadcast Regulatory Authority of India, so as to regulate
electronic media channels and facilitate development of broadcasting services in
India; as electronic media does not come under the ambit of Press Council of India.
The petition has been filed by Advocate Reepak Kansal, alleging that there is no law
in existence to bring broadcasting employees/ Anchors in the definition of journalists
and electronic broadcasting channels in the definitions of 'PRESS' or Journalist etc.
"These self-declared, un-controlled and un-regulated electronic broadcasting channels
are falsely claiming themselves as media and have been running by foreign / Indian
investors in the name of news channels / media. It's Anchors falsely represent
themselves as Journalists. There is clear cut misuse of fourth pillar of democracy by
giving it in the hand of foreign investors. There is scope to weaken the unity and
strength of our nation by the foreign investors," the plea states.
It is further prayed to restrict the electronic media from "assassinating" the dignity of
any individual, community, religious saint or religious/ political organization, in the
name of 'Press'.
The plea states that freedom of speech is not an absolute right under the Indian laws
and Clause (2) of Article 19 of the Indian constitution enables the legislature to impose
certain restrictions on free speech.
"The airwaves are public property and it is necessary to regulate the use of such
airwaves in national and public interest, particularly with a view to ensuring proper
dissemination of content and in the widest possible manner," the plea states.
The Petitioner, represented by Advocate Harisha SR, wishes to curb the evil of media
trail, parallel trial, judgmental views and interference with the administration of
justice.
