Meta, Google asked to take down Nitin Gadkari deepfakes over E20 row by Bombay High Court

The court also ordered that any material recirculating the content in question should be taken down and that, in the event further similar abusive deepfake content and material is circulated against Gadkari, it shall be communicated to the defendant platforms, which shall act on it. The court clarified that if any of the material in question is found to be recirculated, it should be taken down.

“I can only say that the same is absolutely vile, abusive and defamatory and such material should not have a place on a public platform which is accessed by all sections of society including young people. Therefore, I am satisfied that the applicant [Nitin Gadkari] has made out a case for the grant of ad-interim relief,” Justice Arif S Doctor noted in the order.

The High Court was hearing an interim application by Nitin Gadkari, seeking immediate relief in his suit against Meta Platforms, X Corp, Google LLC, among others, including John Doe (all unknown persons), seeking the removal of the “defamatory” content.

The Union minister’s application referred to 26 links featuring face-swap videos, AI-generated images, and cartoons, allegedly using his name, face, voice, and mannerisms without his consent. Seeking Rs 11 crore in damages, Nitin Gadkari had stated that the purpose of his civil suit against Meta Platforms, X Corp, Google LLC and others was not to prevent public discussion or criticism of his actions or government policies.

Advocate Sandeep S Ladda, representing Nitin Gadkari, sought urgent relief pending hearing of the suit in respect of the content appearing on the respective Meta platforms and Google LLC and also referred to an Instagram reel that had no specific or clear user details. Therefore, Ladda said that the publishers of the defamatory and abusive material had been joined as John Doe or Ashok Kumar (unknown persons) in the matter, asserting that the content was required to be pulled down.

Ladda also raised a grievance that offensive materials get republished and recirculated the minute they get uploaded, and urged that they be taken down. He said the defendant platforms, which are intermediaries, have a mechanism in place under the Information Technology (IT) Rules and they should ensure due diligence.

“This is absolutely abusive. Do you have a policy to pull this down? With all this technology at your disposal, don’t you earmark posts that have patently vile, abusive language, that are accessed by everybody and trigger?” Justice Doctor orally questioned the defendant platforms.