The private, and often automated, process for policing copyright in the online world amounts to a new evolution of SLAPPs вЂ“ Strategic Legal Algorithms Against Public Participation вЂ“ where any aggrieved copyright holder can use and game platformsвЂ™ policies and algorithmic systems to take down legitimate criticism, being assured that its wrongful claims will not be penalised. We have seen (and covered on this blog), the use of infringement claims to prevent legitimate criticism of large corporations and prominent personalities in the past, which usually amounted to intimidation, or in extreme cases, SLAPP lawsuits (known commonly as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation), such as TATAвЂ™s suit against Greenpeace (Newslaundry itself recently faced a defamation SLAPP suit from the Times Group). The alleged claims of copyright infringement are unlikely to have any merit, and instead appear designed to be an abuse of the private enforcement mechanisms for copyright that copyright law around the world has facilitated, in conjunction with automated technologies like copyright filters, and economic incentives for large platforms like YouTube to take down speech as suits their own commercial interests (or whims). Fair dealing requirements under Indian law are quite broad, but one would assume they are purpose built for circumstances like this, where short clips from Aaj Tak have been taken and critical commentary added to it by Newslaundry.

Section 52(1)(a)(ii) of the Copyright Act exempts from infringement вЂfair dealingвЂ™ with any work for the purpose of criticism or review. In the present case, the copyright takedown mechanisms has been used as a legal mechanism to take down commentary and criticism of a large broadcasting houseвЂ™s news coverage, something quite squarely covered by copyright exemptions in Indian law. The notice-and-takedown system, unsurprisingly, is prone to abusive behaviour by copyright owners wishing to take down legitimate uploads, or, in many cases, fraudulent behaviour, which is increasingly becoming common in India. YouTube employs a copyright strike system, where if a copyright owner claims infringement over any material on its servers, it takes down the video, the alleged infringer receives a notice (or a вЂstrikeвЂ™), and, if the uploading account receives multiple strikes, YouTube terminates the account, removes all of their videos and permanently blocks them вЂ“ serious implications, particularly for channels like Newslaundry for whom YouTube provides a significant viewership.

YouTubeвЂ™s copyright management system is notorious for mishandling copyright claims, not least because of the scale at which it must manage and navigate legal requirements. The videos flagged (according to Newslaundry, not independently verified by us) pertained to NewslaundryвЂ™s commentary and criticism of Aaj TakвЂ™s broadcast coverage of various issues, which included clips of the coverage.

On October 8, Newslaundry staff revealed that its YouTube operations had been stalled pending an enquiry into 53 separate copyright notices received by YouTube from Aaj Tak. In a new low for Indian media, Aaj Tak (owned by the media conglomerate Living Media) has allegedly taken to using copyright claims to prevent criticism of its reportage by media watchdog Newslaundry. Quite a Newsance to Indian Media Image from Newslaundry

You tube aaj tak