Anti-Piracy Bill Backlash: Censorship Concerns and Implications for India’s IP Enforcement
- Oliver Walsh
- Apr 23
- 3 min read
Controversial Bill Sparks Public Outcry
A new anti-piracy bill backed by major streaming platforms (including Netflix and Disney) has ignited fierce debate after over 30,000 people rallied in protest, calling it “censorship in disguise". The proposal is intended to curb online piracy and protect intellectual property (IP) rights, but as reported by The Times of India, critics argue its broad language opens the door to excessive content removal with minimal due process.
Digital rights advocates – buoyed by a 30,000-strong online campaign – warn that vague provisions would give large corporations unchecked power to take down content “based on mere suspicion of copyright infringement,”, threatening fair use, independent creators, and online freedom. As one activist put it, “Piracy is a problem. But giving away the keys to the internet is not the solution.”
Censorship Fears vs. IP Protection Needs
Supporters of the bill insist it is necessary to protect creators and crack down on illegal distribution of films and music. However, opponents liken the bill to a “SOPA 2.0,” recalling the infamous US Stop Online Piracy Act of 2012, shelved after massive protests over internet censorship. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has slammed the revived site-blocking approach, arguing that it essentially builds an “internet kill switch” and poses “an unequivocal and serious threat to a free and open internet.”
Critics note that most takedowns under such a regime could occur ex parte, without the affected site having a chance to defend itself, effectively “skipping due process entirely.” This clash highlights the persistent tension between aggressive IP enforcement and preservation of digital rights.
India’s Evolving Anti-Piracy Approach
The debate carries strategic significance for India, which is also ramping up efforts against digital piracy but via more measured mechanisms. In 2023, India passed the Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, introducing strict anti-piracy provisions focused on film content.
The law empowers authorities to hold online intermediaries accountable for facilitating film piracy. It mandates appointing government officers to ensure the timely takedown of infringing content. Unlike the contested bill abroad, India’s framework builds in oversight – takedowns are coordinated through designated officers and legal channels, aiming to protect rights holders while upholding due process. Indian courts have likewise taken decisive action through “dynamic” site-blocking injunctions: for example, the Delhi High Court recently blocked 45 pirate websites at once to safeguard content for studios like Warner Bros., Netflix, and Disney. This dynamic injunction model allows swift deactivation of pirate sites but still requires judicial review and unmistakable evidence, a balance that Indian IP professionals have cautiously welcomed.
Implications for IP Enforcement and Policy
These developments underscore the importance of balanced enforcement strategies for IP protection experts in India and Asia-Pacific. On one hand, industry giants' backing of stricter anti-piracy laws reflects a global push to protect creative assets and revenue streams. Digital platforms operating in India may face increasing pressure to police content proactively, especially as laws evolve to hold them more directly responsible for piracy on their services.
On the other hand, public backlash to overbroad measures signals that any enforcement expansion must be coupled with safeguards for online freedoms. Policymakers in India will need to navigate this delicate terrain: effective IP enforcement is critical for the creative economy, but it should not come at the expense of fundamental rights or internet openness.
The current debate is likely to influence India’s policy trajectory, encouraging more precise definitions and due process in anti-piracy initiatives to avoid the perception of censorship.
Comments