Amazon Prime Video Asked by Bombay High Court to Take Down Telugu Film ‘V’ in Defamation Case


2021-03-03 10:59:22

The Bombay High Court has directed OTT platform Amazon to take down a Telugu movie until the makers of the film deleted a scene in which a city-based actor’s photograph was allegedly used without prior permission.

Justice Gautam Patel on Tuesday heard a defamation suit filed by model and actor Sakshi Malik against Venkateshwara Creations for allegedly using her photograph without permission in their movie. Malik’s advocate Saveena Bedi said the scene showed Malik’s photograph, referring to her as a commercial sex worker.

“Simply using another’s image, and most especially a private image, without consent is prima facie impermissible, unlawful, and entirely illegal. In a given case, it may also be defamatory, depending on the type of use,” the court said in its order. The order copy was made available on Wednesday.

“The fact that the image has been illicitly used is bad enough. It only makes matters worse when used in a plainly derogatory and demeaning vein,” Justice Patel said.

The court directed OTT platform Amazon to take down the movie within 24 hours until the said scene is deleted. “It is not acceptable for them (movie’s makers) to merely pixelate or blur the images. The entire sequence, which has the image of the plaintiff (Malik), is to be removed immediately,” Justice Patel said.

Malik’s advocate Bedi had argued that the actor has a huge fan following on social media and has also appeared in a few Bollywood songs.

Bedi argued that Malik’s photo was used illicitly by the defendant in a Telugu movie titled ‘V’ that was released on Amazon on September 5, 2020. As per Malik’s suit, she had commissioned a photographer in 2017 for creating a portfolio.

“In August 2017, she (Malik) posted some photographs from the portfolio on her Instagram account. One of these photos was used in a scene of the Telugu movie where there is reference to a commercial sex worker,” Bedi said.

According to the suit, this was an unauthorised invasion of privacy and unauthorised use of private material. It was defamatory to Malik that her image was used to depict her in the motion picture as an escort or commercial sex worker, it stated.

Justice Patel in the order noted that the contentions raised by Malik and her lawyer were correct.

“Indeed, I do not believe there is any other way of looking at it,” the order said.

The defendant claimed that they had contracted with an agency to procure the image and had assumed that prior approval would have been taken from the woman, whose photo was to be used.

The court, however, noted that this argument of the defendant seemed “less than compelling”.

“Surely any right-thinking motion picture producer would have insisted on seeing an approval or consent by the model or person who is featured or to be featured,” Justice Patel said, adding that this must be the standard procedure everywhere.

The court said once the defendant has made the necessary alteration and deletion, the same will have to be shown to Malik and her advocate. “Only after this, I will allow defendant 3 (Amazon) to re-release the movie,” Justice Patel said, posting the matter for further hearing on March 8.


Is Samsung Galaxy F62 the best phone under Rs. 25,000? We discussed this on Orbital, our weekly technology podcast, which you can subscribe to via Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, or RSS, download the episode, or just hit the play button below.



Source link

27 Comments

  1. AgscGroom March 3, 2021
  2. JbvdGroom March 3, 2021
  3. WesleyUtiff March 6, 2021
  4. Randyabemi March 8, 2021
  5. Randyabemi March 9, 2021
  6. Wayneweday March 11, 2021
  7. Wayneweday March 13, 2021
  8. Wayneweday March 14, 2021
  9. Ricardomus March 16, 2021
  10. Ricardomus March 18, 2021
  11. Ricardomus March 19, 2021
  12. Ricardomus March 20, 2021
  13. MarvinHag March 22, 2021
  14. MarvinHag March 23, 2021
  15. MarvinHag March 26, 2021
  16. MarvinHag March 27, 2021
  17. MarvinHag March 29, 2021
  18. VictorJonge March 30, 2021
  19. VictorJonge March 31, 2021
  20. Frankhem April 2, 2021
  21. Frankhem April 3, 2021
  22. Charlesget April 5, 2021
  23. Charlesget April 6, 2021
  24. Alfredted April 7, 2021
  25. Alfredted April 8, 2021
  26. HarryShife April 10, 2021
  27. HarryShife April 11, 2021

Leave a Reply