Delhi HC pulls up ANI for directly going to YouTube to block news channel

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday pulled up news agency ANI (Asian News International) for directly approaching YouTube to block Dynamite News Network’s channel despite the matter being sub judice, calling the news agency’s conduct "undeserving and unjustified".

A division bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla dismissed ANI’s appeal against a single judge’s 14 October order that had directed YouTube to unblock the Dynamite News channel, observing that ANI’s actions amounted to an attempt to circumvent court proceedings.

“We express our displeasure in the manner the appellant has proceeded in this matter,” the bench said. “The manner in which ANI managed to get the March 21 order reversed and the respondent’s YouTube channel blocked by directly approaching YouTube, in respect of URLs prior to that order, deserves to be deprecated.”

During the hearing, senior advocates Chander Lall and Kunal Vajani, representing Dynamite News editor-in-chief Manoj Tibrewal Aakash, argued that ANI had failed to obtain relief from the court in its copyright suit and instead approached YouTube directly to achieve the same result.

“ANI wanted us to take their licence. We went through negotiations and mediation, and threats were handed out saying our channel would be removed if we didn’t take their licence,” the senior counsel submitted. “I have removed everything.”

The dispute stems from a copyright infringement suit ANI filed earlier this year, alleging that Dynamite News had reproduced nine of its videos without permission. On 21 March, the single judge recorded Dynamite News’ undertaking that it had taken down all nine videos and would refrain from using ANI content in future.

However, on 14 October, Dynamite News informed the court that ANI had subsequently approached YouTube with a list of fresh URLs — uploaded prior to the 21 March order — claiming infringement and seeking the blocking of the channel.

The single judge found this amounted to overreaching the court’s earlier order and directed YouTube to restore Dynamite News’ channel within two days of being approached by the platform. Dynamite News also told the court it was willing to block the specific URLs listed by ANI to ensure compliance.

During Wednesday’s hearing, the division bench noted that the videos in question had already been unblocked by YouTube, but criticised ANI for not informing the single judge before taking unilateral action. “It is not in dispute that ANI did not deem it fit to approach the single judge, despite the matter being pending litigation,” the bench noted.

The court dismissed ANI’s appeal in limine (at the threshold), stating that there was “no merit” in its plea and that its actions were “completely unjustified”.

Counsel for ANI requested that the court’s adverse observations be confined to this specific matter, arguing that they should not prejudice the agency in other ongoing copyright cases. The bench, however, refused, saying it “cannot bind the hands of other courts”.

It clarified that if any infringing clip is uploaded by a third party, it would constitute a separate, independent issue, and the court cannot issue pre-emptive directions on such hypothetical future infringements.

The decision marks a clear judicial caution against media entities taking extra-judicial steps to block competitors’ content, especially when a dispute is already before the court.

With PTI inputs