ANI versus Wikimedia Foundation Defamation case (Delhi High Court)

Accusations

ANI accused Wikipedia of publishing "false and defamatory content intended to harm the reputation of the news organization and undermine its goodwill [4]". The complaint also alleges that Wikipedia had "restricted" editing rights on the article about ANI, allowing only Wikipedia "itself" to make changes. ANI argued that this was evidence of malicious defamation and that the Wikimedia Foundation was using its "executive staff" to "actively" control content [3] [13] [15] [18] [19].

ANI sought a claim of Rs 20 million from the Wikimedia Foundation and sought an injunction against Wikipedia to "produce, publish or disseminate false, misleading and defamatory content about ANI [13] [4]". ANI argued that Wikipedia was an important "intermediary platform" as defined in the Information Technology Act and therefore had to comply with the Act's requirements, including removing content that the government or its agencies considered illegal, or it would be held liable for content posted by its users on the platform [9].

Litigation

Court Order

Judge Chawla issued a summons to Wikimedia and set a hearing date for August 20, 2024 [20] [19]. On August 20, Chawla ordered Wikimedia to disclose the identities of three editors who edited ANI's articles within two weeks so that ANI could initiate legal action against them individually [16] [21] [22]. On September 5, Wikimedia still had not released the identities of the editors, and ANI asked the court to hold it in contempt of court [16] [4]. Judge Chawla agreed and warned Wikimedia that the court might order the Indian government to block Wikipedia. The judge stated, "We cannot tolerate this any longer. If you don't like India, don't do business in India... We will not allow you to have any business here." He ordered an "authorized representative" of the Wikimedia Foundation to appear in person at the next hearing, scheduled for October 25, 2024 [16] [22] [25]. In response, the Wikimedia Foundation stressed that the information in the article was supported by multiple reliable secondary sources and that it was delayed in responding because it was headquartered abroad [16] [26].

A few days later, Wikimedia appealed Chawla's order, asking the court to first find that the defamation allegation was prima facie true before Wikimedia could reveal the identity of the editor [26]. On 14 October, Chief Justice Manmohan Gedela stated that Wikipedia's description of ANI was potentially defamatory and that the editor was liable for it [24] [27]. They also called Wikipedia's identity "extremely disturbing" and warned Wikimedia that it would lose its protection under the safe harbour provision if it chose to defend the defamation allegation [26] [28] [27].

The judges further objected to an entry on the English Wikipedia about the defamation case, accusing it of interfering with the "ongoing case" and expressing strong disapproval over the entry's "criticism of Judge Chawla's order" [26] [29]. Later that week, the court issued an order requiring WMF to delete or remove all Wikipedia pages related to the discussion of the opinions of the "judge" and the "panel" within 36 hours [30] [31] [32]. On October 18, ANI requested the court to initiate contempt proceedings against the Wikimedia Foundation for failing to comply with the 36-hour deadline [33].

On October 21, the Wikimedia Foundation deleted the English Wikipedia entry "Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation", which was the first English Wikipedia entry to be deleted by the Foundation in history [34] [35] [36]. After the Wikimedia Foundation removed the entry, the judge dismissed the contempt of court charge [37].

Subsequent Actions

The English Wikipedia page shows that this entry has been temporarily unavailable. On October 25, ANI urged Wikipedia to remove the news agency's entire Wikipedia entry during a hearing; the judge called the current Wikipedia model "dangerous" [38].

In late October, the Wikimedia Foundation said it would submit basic subscriber information to the court in a sealed document, and would also send a copy to ANI and notify users. "This will prevent any identifying information from being released into the public domain, and the court will have all the necessary information," said Akhil Sibal, a lawyer representing Wikipedia [39] [38] [40].

November Actions

In November, Chief Justice ManmohanRao Gedela accused editors [41].

On November 14, the judge formally issued a subpoena to the editor. At the same time, the High Court ordered the Wikimedia Foundation (defendant 1) to serve the subpoena to defendants 2-4 (i.e. editors) whose identities were not disclosed publicly within 4 days through "all permitted means" (including user email addresses controlled by WMF) [42] [43].

Comments

The Indian Express described the lawsuit as Wikimedia Foundation responsible for its editorial work [9]. Newslaundry reported that the sentences ANI considered defamatory contained "explicit references" to major sources of information, including EU, Politico and The Diplomat, while did name these outlets as sources of the content in its case [4] [14].

On November 5, an Indian government official released a letter from the Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to Wikipedia. The letter pointed out that "there are many biased and inaccurate contents" on Wikipedia and raised the question of whether Wikipedia should be classified as an intermediary rather than a publisher under Indian law. At the same time, the Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting also expressed concerns in the letter that "only a few people have editing rights" [44] [45].

Some critics have criticized the judge's order requiring Wikimedia to reveal the identities of its editors as "censorship and a threat to the flow of information" [21] [14], and the Software Freedom Law Center has criticized the lawsuit as an attack on free speech [46]. Tanveer Hasan, director of the Centre, called it an attack on free speech under the guise of technological regulation [26].

Several lawyers have criticised Judges Manmohan and Katra's order to remove the Wikipedia page related to the case, arguing that the allegation of "interference with the judicial process" was unfounded and that similar reports had been made in the mainstream media [26]. Nishant Shah, Professor of Global Media at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and Fellow at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society, said that Judge Chawla's order to disclose editor information was a challenge to freedom of expression and information and could lead to censorship of "critical speech that the powers that be do not like" [21].

References

  1. CS(OS) 524/2024. Delhi Highcourt. [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-06). (Indian English).
  2. Growing Wikipedia Refines Its 'Anyone Can Edit' Policy. The New York Times. 2006-06-17 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2022-12-12). (English).
  3. Delhi HC Issues Notice To Wikipedia After ANI's Plea. Outlook India. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-14). (English).
  4. newslaundry, Explained: What’s ANI vs Wikipedia legal battle all about?, 2024-09-17 [2024-11-03]
  5. Deep, Aroon. On ANI’s defamation suit against Wikipedia. The Hindu. 2024-09-10 [2024-11-03]. ISSN 0971-751X. (Original content archived on 2024-10-05). (Indian English).
  6. Institute of Network Cultures | Critical Point of View: A Wikipedia Reader. networkcultures. pp. 283–287. 2011 [2024-11-03]. ISBN 978-90-78146-13-1. (Original content archived on 2024-09-12). (English).
  7. Subramanian Swamy. Defamation litigation: a survivor's kit. archive.ph. 2013-07-22 [2024-11-03] (English).
  8. Abdul. First amendment to Constitution challenged: What happened in SC in 1950 that provoked Nehru to amend Article 19(2)?. Free UPSC IAS Preparation For Aspirants. 2022-11-07 [2024-11-03] (American English).
  9. Why has ANI slapped a defamation case against Wikipedia?. The Indian Express. 2024-07-10 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-06). (English).
  10. Explained: 'Safe Harbour' Clause And Why Government Wants It Gone. NDTV. 2023-03-10 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-27). (English).
  11. Gupta, Abhishek Nath Tripathi & Narayan. Intermediary Status: Socially Available, Legally Endangered. LiveLaw. 2021-06-08 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2021-06-24). (English).
  12. Explained: Social media and safe harbour. The Indian Express. 2021-05-27 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2023-11-22). (Indian English).
  13. Staff, OpIndia. ANI files Rs 2 crores defamation suit against Wikipedia in Delhi High Court. OpIndia. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-15). (British English).
  14. Lobo, Simone. ANI case: How Delhi HC’s Wikipedia ban threat affects India. MEDIANAMA. 2024-10-10 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-19). (American English).
  15. Parasnis, Sharveya. ANI Sues Wikipedia for Defamation, Demands INR 2 Crore. MEDIANAMA. 2024-07-10 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-10). (American English).
  16. Bureau, The Hindu. Delhi High Court cautions Wikipedia for non-compliance of order. The Hindu. 2024-09-05 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X. (Original content archived on 2024-09-14). (Indian English).
  17. Deep, Aroon. Content determined by volunteer editors, says Wikipedia parent. The Hindu. 2024-07-12 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X. (Original content archived on 2024-09-23). (Indian English).
  18. Abhinav Singh. ‘Please don’t work in India if...’: Indian court reprimands Wikipedia for not obeying orders. WION. 2024-09-05 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-05). (Indian English).
  19. News agency ANI files Rs 2 crore defamation suit against Wikipedia in Delhi High Court. Deccan Herald. [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-06). (English).
  20. Desk, News. ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages. The Siasat Daily. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-09). (English).
  21. Why the case against Wikipedia in India is a challenge to freedom of speech and information. The Indian Express. 2024-09-17 [2024-11-03]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-19). (Indian English).
  22. Delhi HC issues contempt notice to Wikipedia, warns of blocking website in country. The Economic Times. 2024-09-06 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0013-0389. (Original content archived on 2024-10-06). (English).
  23. Krishna Yadav. Delhi HC warns Wikipedia over ANI defamation case, issues contempt notice. mint. 2024-09-05 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-09-27). (English).
  24. Team, The Hindu Data. ANI vs Wikipedia: The free encyclopedia’s impact on India and more. The Hindu. 2024-09-12 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X. (Original content archived on 2024-10-10). (Indian English).
  25. Jha, Prashant. "Will ask government to block you": Delhi High Court issues contempt of court notice to Wikipedia. Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news. 2024-09-05 [2024-11-04] (English).
  26. Bhalla, Vineet. Why Delhi HC is angry with Wikipedia for calling ANI a ‘government propaganda tool’. Scroll.in. 2024-10-19 [2024-11-04] (English).
  27. Ahsan, Sofi. ANI versus Wikipedia: What is at stake?. Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news. 2024-10-20 [2024-11-04] (English).
  28. Srivastava, Bhavini. Delhi High Court slams Wikipedia for refusal to divulge identity of those who edited ANI's page. Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news. 2024-10-14 [2024-11-04] (English).
  29. Thapliyal, Nupur. Delhi High Court Takes Exception To Wikipedia Page On Pending Defamation Suit By ANI, Says Majesty Of Court Is Over And Above Anyone. LiveLaw. 2024-10-14 [2024-11-04] (English).
  30. Thapliyal, Nupur. 'Prima Facie Contemptuous': Delhi High Court Orders Take Down Of Wikipedia Page On Pending Defamation Suit By ANI. LiveLaw. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04] (English).
  31. Bureau, The Hindu. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
  32. Srivastava, Bhavini. Delhi High Court orders Wikipedia to take down page on ongoing case filed by ANI. Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04] (English).
  33. Shruti Kakkar. ANI asks HC to initate contempt case against Wikipedia, says 36 hr deadline over. Hindustan Times. 2024-10-18
  34. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
  35. ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages. The Siasat Daily. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-09). (English).
  36. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
  37. ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages. The Siasat Daily. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-09). (English).
  38. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
  39. ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages. The Siasat Daily. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-09). (English).
  40. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
  41. ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages. The Siasat Daily. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-09). (English).
  42. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
  43. ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages. The Siasat Daily. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-09). (English).
  44. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
  45. ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages. The Siasat Daily. 2024-07-09 [2024-11-04]. (Original content archived on 2024-07-09). (English).
  46. ANI vs Wikipedia defamation case: Delhi High Court orders Wikimedia to take down ANI page within 36 hours. The Hindu. 2024-10-16 [2024-11-04]. ISSN 0971-751X (Indian English).
Case Status