In a ground-breaking development for Kerala, law enforcement has initiated a case against online film critics and social media platforms in response to a complaint from a film director who alleges that his film was intentionally maligned and defamed with the intention of extorting and blackmailing him.
Legal Action Against Online Film Reviewers and Social Media Platforms: A Case Study
The Kochi City Police took action based on a complaint lodged by Ubaini E, the director of the film “Rahel Makan Kora.” The First Information Report (FIR) was filed under sections 385 (extortion) and 120 (o) of the Kerala Police Act.
The individuals named as defendants in this case include the proprietor of the film promotion company Hains, social media reviewers Arun Tharanga and Aswanth Kok, a Facebook account user under the name anoopanu6165, a social media handle known as soulmates55, and the platforms YouTube and Facebook.
This legal action occurred at a time when the director of the film “Aromalinte Aadyathe Pranayam,” Mubeen Rauf, had approached the Kerala High Court, seeking an injunction to prevent social media influencers and film review vloggers from publishing reviews of his movie on social media for a minimum of seven days following its release.
Earlier this month, Justice Devan Ramachandran appointed Shyam Padman as Amicus Curiae, who informed the court that there was ample evidence to establish the existence of vested interests, some of whom believed they could either “make or break movies.” Padman referred to these activities as “review bombing.”
Efforts to Regulate Online Film Reviews and Combat Review Manipulation Underway
The court has requested directives from the state police chief while noting the necessity for procedures that would allow directors, producers, or other film industry personnel to file complaints, thereby triggering a proper investigation under the Penal Law and laws pertaining to cybercrimes.
On Wednesday, the state police chief informed the court that protocols were being developed to prevent “motivated, malicious, negative reviews” and “review bombings.” The court also inquired whether standards outlined by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) could be implemented to curb fake reviews.
The court acknowledged the need for careful consideration in developing protocols to distinguish between genuine and well-intentioned “reviews” and those that are motivated and malevolent. The matter was scheduled for further consideration in two weeks.
