- 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
FIR against Google CEO by filmmaker
The Mumbai Court had been approached by Darshan regarding his 2017 film 'Ek Haseena Thi Ek Deewana Tha' alleging that it had been illegally uploaded on YouTube, despite Darshan having disclosed no film rights to anyone.
The Mumbai Police have registered a First Information Report (FIR) against Google CEO Sundar Pichai and YouTube Managing Director Gautam Anand for copyright infringement on behalf of Bollywood filmmaker Suneel Darshan.
As per Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the FIR was filed by the police in response to an order made by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate AA Panchbhai.
A formal complaint under the Copyright Act was filed for violations of Sections 51, 63, and 69.
The Court observed in its order that the complaint reveals prima-facie evidence that the accused is guilty of an offense punishable under sections 63 r/w section 51 r/w. 69 of the Copyright Act, 1957, which is cognizable. Thus, the matter must be handled by the police," the Magistrate ruled.
In a private complaint filed with the Mumbai High Court in 2017, Darshan stated that his film 'Ek Haseena Thi Ek Deewana Tha' had been illegally uploaded on YouTube even though he has not granted rights to its release.
He also alleged that his rights have been violated prima facie since the movie, after being illegally uploaded on YouTube, has garnered billions of views and is earning revenue without him having a share of it.
As long as he has not disclosed the film rights to any of the parties involved in the case, his rights are being infringed mercilessly.
In addition, Darshan claims that he has filed several complaints with YouTube, but nobody has responded.
In his decision, the Magistrate noted that piracy and copyright infringement have become major problems due to rapid technology advancement. It causes the film and television industry a great loss.
The Court continued, "Commercial exploitation under the guise of fair use must also be prevented."
The charges against Google's grievance officer and three executives like Chaitanya Prabhu, Namrata Rajkumar and Pawan Agarwal are in addition accused besides Sundar Pichai and Gautam Anand.