Delhi HC directs Microsoft and Google to file review before single judge in non-consensual intimate images case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday asked tech giants Microsoft and Google to review the single judge’s order, which had directed the search engines to proactively remove Non-Consensual Intimate Images (NCII) from the internet without any specific URLs were needed.

The companies had argued that implementation of such guidelines is technologically infeasible and goes beyond the existing legal framework.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora underscored the importance of presenting facts to the single judge through an adjudication process.

It also assured that if Microsoft and Google remain dissatisfied with the single judge’s decision, they could seek a renewal of their appeal.

In addition, the court extended a two-week period for filing the investigation, noting that delays in filing would not be grounds for dismissal.

Senior lawyers Arvind Nigam and Jayant Mehta, representing Google and Microsoft respectively, argued that the single judge’s directions were beyond the capabilities of their current technology. They took on the challenge of implementing measures beyond their current capabilities, especially in the area of ​​automatically identifying and removing content without specific URLs.

Both attorneys said that while technology is evolving, the existing capabilities of their search engines are not in line with the court’s guidelines. They acknowledged ongoing efforts to improve the technology, but said it remains imperfect at this time.

The appeals from Microsoft and Google challenge a ruling by Judge Subramonium Prasad on April 26.

Justice Prasad had warned the social media intermediaries that they risk losing their liability protection if they do not adhere to the time frame stipulated in the Information Technology Rules for removing non-consensual intimate content.

He had said that search engines have the necessary technology to remove NCII content without victims having to repeatedly seek court intervention, and that he cannot plead helplessness in removing or disabling access to links containing illegal content contain.

Also read

It was argued that the single judge’s reliance on Meta’s content removal tool is misplaced as Bing, Microsoft’s search engine, does not host content.

Mehta had argued that it is not feasible to comply with the court’s order to proactively search and remove such content from the database given the current technological limitations. He also pointed out the impracticality of deploying artificial intelligence (AI) tools to implement the guidelines, as AI would have difficulty distinguishing between consensual and non-consensual images.