Delhi High Court to Examine Social Media Account Suspensions Over Copyright Strikes
The Delhi High Court has agreed to examine whether social media platforms can suspend or delete user accounts based on copyright strikes. The matter was taken up in a case filed by content creator Saurabh Maurya, whose Instagram account was suspended by Meta following copyright claims that were later found to be false.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani directed the parties to address whether such suspensions or deletions are consistent with principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India and the Delhi High Court in Myspace Inc. v. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. These judgments have shaped the legal framework on free speech and intermediary liability in India.
As per Mr. Maurya's plea, third parties uploaded his videos on other platforms, manipulated the dates of the uploads, and then issued copyright strikes claiming ownership of the content. Acting on these strikes, Meta suspended his Instagram account, even though he asserted that he was the original creator of the videos.
Appearing for Mr. Maurya, senior advocate Diya Kapur and advocate Nakul Gandhi argued that the account suspension was unjustified. They submitted that the copyright-strike system used by social media platforms lacks adequate safeguards to prevent misuse.
During the hearing, Meta informed the court that the copyright strikes against Mr. Maurya were found to be fake and had been reversed. The company stated that his account had been restored. However, Mr. Maurya's counsel contended that mere restoration of the account does not address the larger legal issue of whether the copyright-strike mechanism complies with established legal principles.
The court took note of the submissions and directed the defendants to specifically respond on this issue in their replies. It also recorded Meta's statement regarding the restoration of the account. The next hearing is scheduled for September 24.
In Myspace Inc. v. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd, the Delhi High Court examined the liability of online platforms for copyright infringement by users. The court laid down guidelines that balance the interests of copyright holders with the need to protect intermediaries from undue liability. These principles are now central to the present dispute.
The case raises important questions about due process and the rights of content creators. In Shreya Singhal, the Supreme Court emphasised the need for procedural safeguards before speech is restricted. The court's examination could clarify whether the automated copyright enforcement systems used by platforms must incorporate similar safeguards.
For many creators, social media accounts are essential to their livelihood. A suspension without proper verification of claims can cause significant damage. The outcome of this case may influence how platforms balance copyright protection with the rights of users.
The Delhi High Court's decision will be watched closely by legal experts and the digital rights community.
