ANI’s Defamation Case Against Wikipedia

Context: Asian News International (ANI) has filed a case with the Delhi High Court against Wikipedia, alleging that defamatory content on ANI’s Wikipedia page has tarnished its reputation.

Reason for the Suit Against Wikipedia:

• Wikipedia’s Role: Wikipedia, launched in 2001, is a collaborative, open-source, nonprofit platform where users contribute content. ANI’s lawsuit targets Wikipedia as an intermediary rather than individual editors to ensure enforcement by holding the platform accountable.

Laws Invoked in the Case:

• Section 2(1)(w) of the IT Act, 2000: Defines a significant social media intermediary, which includes entities that receive, store, or transmit records or provide services related to those records.
• Sections 79(2) and (3) of the IT Act: Detail the conditions under which intermediaries can claim safe harbor protection, shielding them from liability for third-party content.

Safe Harbour Clause:

• Section 79 of the IT Act: Exempts intermediaries from liability for third-party information, data, or communication hosted on their platform if certain conditions are met.

Conditions for Safe Harbour:

• The intermediary must not initiate the transmission, select the receiver, or modify the transmitted information (Section 79(2)(b)).
• Compliance with the Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code, including grievance redressal mechanisms and designated officers.
• Immediate removal or disabling of access to the material upon government notification.
• Non-tampering with any evidence of messages or content on the platform.
• Rule 7 of the IT Rules, 2021: States that failure to observe these rules results in loss of safe harbor protection and makes the intermediary liable.

Previous Supreme Court Rulings:

• 2022: The SC dismissed petitions by the Ayurvedic Medicine Manufacturers Organisation of India against Wikipedia for alleged defamatory content, advising petitioners to seek other legal remedies.
• 2023: In Hewlett Packard India Sales vs. Commissioner of Customs, the SC acknowledged the usefulness of online sources like Wikipedia but warned about the potential for misleading information due to its crowd-sourced, user-generated editing model.