The Court had, therefore, sought the response of the State Police Chief on implementing protocols to ensure that action is taken on those who post derogatory and calculated movie reviews on the internet.
Since the issue was one that is relatively new and required some research to understand, the Court had appointed Senior Advocate Shyam Padman as amicus curiae.
“Every movie is an intellectual property. Apart from being so, it also entails reputation, sweat, blood and aspirations of several people, not merely the producers, lead stars, or the directors,” the Court had observed in one of its interim orders.
During subsequent hearings, the Court called for close monitoring of online platforms and urged the authorities to act against malicious anonymous content by invoking the relevant provisions of the Information Technology Act (IT Act) without delay.
“The reputation of individuals behind a film cannot be sacrificed at the alter of unbridled freedom of expression asserted by individuals, who act under the mistaken impression that they are not governed by any parameters/regulations, particularly when there is nothing on record to show that any of them are registered, akin to Journalists or such other service providers“, the Court said.
During a hearing in February this year, Padman offered to go through the protocols that were placed on record by the State Police Chief and suggest whether any fine-tuning would be required.
Source: Barandbench
