The plaintiffs before the court had submitted that though channels disseminating the infringing material were taken down by Telegram, more and more continue to come up on a daily basis. (File)Rejecting Telegram’s argument that it cannot disclose the user information as that would violate its privacy policy and the laws of the jurisdiction where its physical servers are located, the Delhi High Court has directed the messaging app to disclose in a sealed cover the details of the channels and devices used to disseminate alleged infringing content, along with the mobile numbers, IP addresses and email ids of such users.
Justice Pratibha M Singh in a ruling said that disclosure, on the basis of a court order, of the details of the channel operators who are disseminating materials infringing the copyrighted works, or the devices and other gadgets used, cannot be shielded under the grounds of protection of privacy or protection of freedom of speech and expression.
“The origin and source of the infringing material has to be traced and such devices or persons involved in the infringement ought to face consequences in accordance with law, including being held liable for damages. That would not be possible if the source of such infringing copies, i.e., the details of the infringing channels are not disclosed,” said the court in an August 30 ruling made public on Wednesday.
The order has been passed in a suit filed by K D Campus Private Limited and their teacher Neetu Singh alleging that the study material prepared by them for various competitive examinations was being disseminated unauthorisedly through various Telegram channels. Upon pursuing the information sought from Telegram, the court said, it will consider passing further directions.
Subscriber Only Stories
Justice Singh said merely because Telegram chooses to locate its server in Singapore, the copyright owners in India cannot be left remediless. The courts in India would be perfectly justified in directing Telegram, which runs its massive operations in India, to adhere to Indian law and adhere to orders passed by Indian courts for disclosure of relevant information relating to infringers, added the court.
“Infringers cannot be permitted to seek shelter under Telegram’s policies merely on the ground that its physical server is in Singapore,” said Justice Singh, adding even Singapore’s Personal Data Protection Act makes an exception to privacy and recognises violation of laws.
The disclosure of personal data for the purpose of any proceedings related to infringement of copyright would be a recognised exception to data privacy under the Singapore law, said the court. Rejecting Telegram’s other argument that being an intermediary, it is not required to disclose the details of the originator of the information, the court said merely disabling or taking down the channel is an insufficient remedy.
“The channels are clearly hydra-headed and are surfacing one after the other owing to the ease with which they can be created, with just another mobile number or email address,” said the bench, adding infringements would have to be nipped in the bud and courts cannot perpetually supervise the issue.
The court further said that in the present age of cloud computing and diminishing national boundaries in data storage, conventional concepts of territoriality cannot be strictly applied.
Noting that teachers and education system as a whole during the Covid-19 pandemic have taken a great initiative to ensure access of education materials through online modes, the court said if the protection of copyright is not evolved as per the changing times, it would have a chilling effect on the progressive initiatives taken by the educators.
The plaintiffs before the court had submitted that though channels disseminating the infringing material were taken down by Telegram, more and more continue to come up on a daily basis. The court on July 28, 2020 had passed an inter order in the suit. Since the order did not prove effective in curbing the unauthorised dissemination, the plaintiffs moved an application seeking disclosure related to the person operating such channels.
Telegram had argued that as per its privacy policy, until and unless a person is confirmed to be a terror suspect, the disclosure of the subscriber information cannot be made. “Telegram has its servers based in Singapore which has encrypted data. Accordingly, decryption of that data would not be permissible except as per the laws of Singapore,” its counsel had further argued.