Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain IT Rules Takedown Plea In Copyright Case; Allows Plea To Be Withdrawn

The Delhi High Court has observed that a direction to intermediaries to take down content on the basis of private copyright claims cannot be granted without a prior determination by a court, while dealing with a plea seeking removal of allegedly infringing content.

“The private intermediaries cannot be expected to, in the absence of there being a finding rendered by a Court, to take down, suspend or block content, which is contended by an individual to be their intellectual property,” the court observed.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the order while hearing a petition filed by Digital IP Brand Protection Alliance against the Union of India and multiple intermediaries.

The dispute arose from the petitioner-society's allegation that its members' content, including music videos, music and educational material, was being subjected to unauthorised copying, distribution and commercial exploitation on intermediary platforms.

The petitioner further claimed that complaints made on October 24, 27 and 28, 2025 to one of the intermediaries resulted only in a generic response, with no “effective compliance”.

It approached the court seeking directions to ensure that intermediaries comply with their obligations under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, including taking down the allegedly infringing content within a specified timeframe, preventing its reappearance, preserving relevant logs and metadata, and disclosing details of the first originator of the content.

However, the court held that the petitioner, under the garb of enforcing due diligence requirements under the statutory framework, was effectively seeking an injunction.

"This Court is of the view that under the garb of ensuring compliance with the due diligence requirements, provided for under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, the petitioner cannot be permitted to, effectively, seek an injunction"

The court observed that before any such direction for takedown or blocking can be issued, the petitioner must establish before a court of law that the content is its intellectual property and that the essential prerequisites for the grant of an injunction are satisfied.

At this stage, the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

The court allowed the request and dismissed the petition as withdrawn

For Petitioner: Advocates Abhishek Singh, Karan Chaudhary

For Respondent no. 3: Advocates Aditya Gupta, Rohith Venkatesan,