- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Delhi High Court issues summons to ‘People of India’ in ‘Humans of Bombay’ Copyright Infringement Suit
Delhi High Court issues summons to ‘People of India’ in ‘Humans of Bombay’ Copyright Infringement Suit
The matter will be heard on 11 October
The Delhi High Court has issued a summons to an Instagram handle People of India in a copyright infringement suit filed by the storytelling platform Humans of Bombay.
In the Humans of Bombay Stories Pvt Ltd vs. POI Social Media Pvt Ltd case, Justice Prathiba M Singh also issued notice to People of India on the interim relief application filed by Humans of Bombay to restrain the former from using its copyrighted content.
The Bench ordered, “In view of the matter, issue notice to the defendants. In addition, intimation be issued by the plaintiff’s counsel through e-mail. A notice be also issued by the registry through e-mail to the defendants that on the next date of hearing, the interim application shall be considered for ad interim relief.”
The Counsel for Humans of Bombay argued that the Court would have jurisdiction to hear the suit since several subjects who were being interviewed by People of India were based out of Delhi.
At this, Justice Singh called for an affidavit to be placed on record within one week. She posted the matter for hearing on 11 October.
Humans of Bombay had approached the Court stating that its content, literary works, materials, films, and creative works published on the website, Instagram handle, and YouTube channel were being replicated by People of India.
It contended that it engaged in substantial research and approached people who were interested in narrating their life stories. The stories were then converted into audio-video works and uploaded on the website and other platforms.
Furthermore, it apprised the Court that People of India completely replicated its business model and was approaching the same subjects displayed on the website of Humans of Bombay.
Justice Singh noted that prima facie, there was a substantial imitation, and in some cases, the images were identical. Thus, she issued notices and summons on the suit.
Humans of Bombay were represented by advocates Abhishek Malhotra, Shilpa Gamnani, and Ishita Goel.