More Stories

Informist, Tuesday, Aug. 11, 2026

 

NEW DELHI – The Delhi High Court Tuesday said that it will examine whether Meta Platforms Inc.'s copyright strike system of blocking social media accounts was in violation of verdicts on free speech and copyright breaches. The high court has sought Meta's response on its system of blocking, deleting accounts, and taking down contents of users even if a fake copyright claim has been made by some users putting those contents on a backdate. 

 

The high court was hearing a plea by Saurabh Maurya, who makes educational contents related to stock marketing. Maurya said that various people were making videos and putting it on a backdate, thereafter accusing him of infringing their copyright. Consequently, intermediaries like Meta are blocking the social media accounts because they do not have power to assess those contents, said Maurya.

 

"You are challenging their system of copyright strikes?" asked Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani. He noted the petitioner's argument that Meta's copyright strike system was in violation of the apex court's ruling in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India's 2015 verdict and Delhi High Court's MySpace Inc. vs Super Cassettes Industries Ltd.'s 2016 judgment.

 

In the Shreya Singhal vs Union of India case, the Supreme Court had struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 for violating free speech. Section 66A of the Information Technology Act criminalised sending "offensive" or "menacing" messages through a computer or electronic device. The apex court had said that online intermediaries only need to remove content upon receiving actual knowledge through a formal court order or government notification. 

 

In MySpace Inc. vs Super Cassettes Industries' case, the high court had ruled that intermediaries get safe harbour protection under the Information Technology Act against third-party copyright breaches. The high court had held that "actual knowledge" of the copyright content meant specific, targeted notice from the copyright owner pointing to exact infringing uniform resource locators, not a general obligation to pre-screen or filter all user uploads.

 

The petitioner argued that under the provisions of the Information Technology Act and the Copyright Act, 1957, an intermediary to avail safe harbour protection cannot be allowed to suspend the account merely on the basis of a copyright strike and that the suspension of account is warranted. This discretion available with intermediary is in the teeth of what was held by the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court earlier, said the petitioner.

 

Meta said that the account of the plaintiff has been restored and the copyright strikes were found to be fake and 13 of those strikes have been reversed. Meta assured the court that the petitioner's account will not be taken down on account of copyright strikes.  End

 

Reported by Surya Tripathi

Edited by Akul Nishant Akhoury

 

For users of real-time market data terminals, Informist news is available exclusively on the NSE Cogencis WorkStation.

 

Cogencis news is now Informist news. This follows the acquisition of Cogencis Information Services Ltd. by NSE Data & Analytics Ltd., a 100% subsidiary of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. As a part of the transaction, the news department of Cogencis has been sold to Informist Media Pvt. Ltd.

 

Informist Media Tel +91 (11) 4220-1000

Send comments to feedback@informistmedia.com

 

© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2026. All rights reserved.