Magazines

Subscribe to our print & digital magazines now

Subscribe

Amul wants removal of videos from YouTube and Facebook, says they show cruelty to cows

The Delhi High Court has sought the response of Facebook & Google on a petition moved by the Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation (GCMMF) Limited that sells milk as well as dairy products under Amul trademark, asking for the removal of certain videos alleging that those are brutal to cows.

Updated on: 14 December, 2020 11:41 PM IST By: Pritam Kashyap
Amul wants removal of videos from YouTube and Facebook, says they show cruelty to cows

The Delhi High Court has sought the response of Facebook & Google on a petition moved by the Gujarat Cooperative Milk Marketing Federation (GCMMF) Limited that sells milk as well as dairy products under Amul trademark, asking for the removal of certain videos alleging that those are brutal to cows.

Issuing notice to the social media platforms and the individual who uploaded the videos & seeking their replies to the GCMMF's suit, Justice Mukta Gupta abstained from passing any interim order ordering the removal of the videos, titled "Unholy Cattle of India: Exposing Cruelty in the Indian Dairy Industry", from Facebook and YouTube.

HC has asked the person, who uploaded the video, to point in his reply how the GCMMF or its members were indulging in cruelty to cows and why Amul's mascot was used in that video.  With the direction, the court listed the matter for hearing on 15 January 2021. 

The GCMMF, in its suit, has sought the removal of the videos from YouTube & Facebook (FB), claiming that the one that has uploaded those are targeting it. 

The suit has contended that the videos uploaded on social media platform by defendant Nitin Jain "were slanderous and disparaged and denigrated the Amul brand & trademark". 

Jain's lawyers, senior advocate Raj Panjwani & advocates Supriya Juneja and Priyanka Bangari has told the high court that the Amul brand trademark wasn't getting used by their client for commercial purposes. 

Taking note of the defendant's stand and therefore the incontrovertible fact that the videos were within the property right since 2018, the court said it had been not passing any ad interim injunction and was allowing Jain to file his reply. 

"Along with the reply affidavit, the defendant 1 i.e. Jain also will state whether it obtains any profits out of the videos uploaded and if yes, the statement of accounts thereof," the High Court said. 

Take this quiz to know more about radish Take a quiz

Show your support

Dear patron, thank you for being our reader. Readers like you are an inspiration for us to move Agri Journalism forward. We need your support to keep delivering quality Agri Journalism and reach the farmers and people in every corner of rural India.

Every contribution is valuable for our future.

Contribute Now