If the headline seems bizarre, it does not hold a candle to the Madras High Court order that inspired it..On July 15 of last year, the High Court passed an order directing a host of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block as many as 169 websites (that number was changed to 225 in a subsequent order), on the grounds of copyright infringement..And now, it seems that the order has unwittingly resulted in the blocking of Pinterest, an online bookmarking portal. As reported by ET, users of the ACT Fibernet ISP are unable to access the site, which has been blocked as per the instructions of the “competent government authority in compliance to the orders of Court of Law”..The order was passed by Justice N Kirubakaran in a petition filed by the producers of the Rajnikant film, Kabali, released in 2016. The petitioner sought an interim injunction on “rogue websites” that would allow streaming and downloading of the movie, before its release..Holding that the petitioner’s right to carry on business and right to life guaranteed under Articles 19(1) and 21 of the Constitution were affected, the Court passed an order directing the ISPs to prevent a list of websites from streaming or making the movie available for download..But how did Pinterest get blocked in all this?.The order states that the petitioner had hired the services of a company “which has expertise in collecting information pertaining to internet piracy and the potential infringing websites”. It was this company that determined the 169 websites that were to be blocked. Why they included Pinterest in this list is anybody’s guess..This is not the first time such a thing has happened. In August 2015, the Department of Telecom had directed Indian ISPs to take down 857 sites with pornographic content, invoking its powers under Section 79 (3)(b) of the Information Technology Act. Then too, a number of websites which had nothing even remotely to do with porn were taken down..Back then, Chinmayi Arun, Research Director at the Centre for Communication Governance, NLU Delhi raised a number of relevant questions. Speaking to Bar & Bench, she said,.“I wonder if anyone checked to make sure whether all 857 links definitely contain illegal content. Another question is who makes a list of these links?.Last year, the Minister for Communications and Information Technology had asked the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) to make a list of porn sites to be blocked comprehensively across ISPs. If they have come up with the list, it raises serious questions about the propriety of asking an industry body to come up with a list of content to be blocked. The origins of this list would therefore be worth looking into.”.Towards the last few pages of the order, Justice Kirubakaran goes on a completely different tangent, waxing eloquent about the demise of the film industry. Appealing more to rhetoric than reasoning, the order states,.“Gone are the days of actors like MGR and Sivaji Ganesan, whose films and the characters portrayed by them went a long way in reforming the society and in inculcating moral values in the minds of the public….…Many social evils and recent crimes are, no doubt, the effect of recent films. Youths are made to believe that they can win over an urban girl by constant stalking and when they fail in their attempt, they are unable to withstand the frustration and they resort to committing crimes. The Cinema Industry, especially, the leading actors, should think over before accepting any role as to the impact, it is likely to cause on the society, in general, as well as on youngsters and their fans. They should also avoid drinking and smoking in their movies so as to prevent their fans from following them….The judge then makes a reference to a judgment that he penned a few years ago, in which it was held,.…social obligations and responsibilities are cast upon actors especially leading Heroes, who have large fans, to think twice before doing anti-hero roles which will induce and encourage negative message. Apart from making money, the leading actors have obligations and responsibilities to the people. As most of the youngsters consider their heroes as their “Role Models” the actors are duty bound to give positive message…”.Kirubakaran J also makes a (rather factually incorrect) reference to Alfred Hitchcock and that famous shower scene in ‘Psycho’..“Hollywood Film makers like late Hitchcock had the foresight to know the effect of the movie on the common man. It was reported in the media that Hitchcock made the film “Psycho” in colour. In one scene, a person was murdered and the blood oozed outflow in the drainage. After seeing the rushes, understanding the effect of the scene, Hitchcock made the film in black and white to avoid gory and horrible effect of the movie. Such was the greatness of Hitchcock, who is known for his thriller movies. This Court expects the film makers to exhibit some degree of such responsibility exhibited by Hitchcock in the interest of society.”.Quite inexplicably, the order ends with a direction to the Centre to consider casting Corporate Social Responsibility on the film industry..“…in view of the present day scenario in the Cinema Industry, the impact of Cinema on the masses and circulation of large amount of money in the business, a form of self-regulation is necessary for the Cinema Industry in the line of “Corporate Social Responsibility” as envisaged under Section 135 and Schedule VII of The Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, Union of India, namely, respondents 1 to 3, have to respond with regard to the suggestion made by this Court to cast a social responsibility/obligation similar to “Corporate Social Responsibility” on Cinema Industry.”.Read the order:
If the headline seems bizarre, it does not hold a candle to the Madras High Court order that inspired it..On July 15 of last year, the High Court passed an order directing a host of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block as many as 169 websites (that number was changed to 225 in a subsequent order), on the grounds of copyright infringement..And now, it seems that the order has unwittingly resulted in the blocking of Pinterest, an online bookmarking portal. As reported by ET, users of the ACT Fibernet ISP are unable to access the site, which has been blocked as per the instructions of the “competent government authority in compliance to the orders of Court of Law”..The order was passed by Justice N Kirubakaran in a petition filed by the producers of the Rajnikant film, Kabali, released in 2016. The petitioner sought an interim injunction on “rogue websites” that would allow streaming and downloading of the movie, before its release..Holding that the petitioner’s right to carry on business and right to life guaranteed under Articles 19(1) and 21 of the Constitution were affected, the Court passed an order directing the ISPs to prevent a list of websites from streaming or making the movie available for download..But how did Pinterest get blocked in all this?.The order states that the petitioner had hired the services of a company “which has expertise in collecting information pertaining to internet piracy and the potential infringing websites”. It was this company that determined the 169 websites that were to be blocked. Why they included Pinterest in this list is anybody’s guess..This is not the first time such a thing has happened. In August 2015, the Department of Telecom had directed Indian ISPs to take down 857 sites with pornographic content, invoking its powers under Section 79 (3)(b) of the Information Technology Act. Then too, a number of websites which had nothing even remotely to do with porn were taken down..Back then, Chinmayi Arun, Research Director at the Centre for Communication Governance, NLU Delhi raised a number of relevant questions. Speaking to Bar & Bench, she said,.“I wonder if anyone checked to make sure whether all 857 links definitely contain illegal content. Another question is who makes a list of these links?.Last year, the Minister for Communications and Information Technology had asked the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) to make a list of porn sites to be blocked comprehensively across ISPs. If they have come up with the list, it raises serious questions about the propriety of asking an industry body to come up with a list of content to be blocked. The origins of this list would therefore be worth looking into.”.Towards the last few pages of the order, Justice Kirubakaran goes on a completely different tangent, waxing eloquent about the demise of the film industry. Appealing more to rhetoric than reasoning, the order states,.“Gone are the days of actors like MGR and Sivaji Ganesan, whose films and the characters portrayed by them went a long way in reforming the society and in inculcating moral values in the minds of the public….…Many social evils and recent crimes are, no doubt, the effect of recent films. Youths are made to believe that they can win over an urban girl by constant stalking and when they fail in their attempt, they are unable to withstand the frustration and they resort to committing crimes. The Cinema Industry, especially, the leading actors, should think over before accepting any role as to the impact, it is likely to cause on the society, in general, as well as on youngsters and their fans. They should also avoid drinking and smoking in their movies so as to prevent their fans from following them….The judge then makes a reference to a judgment that he penned a few years ago, in which it was held,.…social obligations and responsibilities are cast upon actors especially leading Heroes, who have large fans, to think twice before doing anti-hero roles which will induce and encourage negative message. Apart from making money, the leading actors have obligations and responsibilities to the people. As most of the youngsters consider their heroes as their “Role Models” the actors are duty bound to give positive message…”.Kirubakaran J also makes a (rather factually incorrect) reference to Alfred Hitchcock and that famous shower scene in ‘Psycho’..“Hollywood Film makers like late Hitchcock had the foresight to know the effect of the movie on the common man. It was reported in the media that Hitchcock made the film “Psycho” in colour. In one scene, a person was murdered and the blood oozed outflow in the drainage. After seeing the rushes, understanding the effect of the scene, Hitchcock made the film in black and white to avoid gory and horrible effect of the movie. Such was the greatness of Hitchcock, who is known for his thriller movies. This Court expects the film makers to exhibit some degree of such responsibility exhibited by Hitchcock in the interest of society.”.Quite inexplicably, the order ends with a direction to the Centre to consider casting Corporate Social Responsibility on the film industry..“…in view of the present day scenario in the Cinema Industry, the impact of Cinema on the masses and circulation of large amount of money in the business, a form of self-regulation is necessary for the Cinema Industry in the line of “Corporate Social Responsibility” as envisaged under Section 135 and Schedule VII of The Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, Union of India, namely, respondents 1 to 3, have to respond with regard to the suggestion made by this Court to cast a social responsibility/obligation similar to “Corporate Social Responsibility” on Cinema Industry.”.Read the order:
