MCA amends CSR provisions of the Companies Act, 2013
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (“MCA”) has amended Schedule VII of the Companies Act, 2013 (the “Act”) to now include ‘disaster management, including relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities’ in the list of entries for activities which may be included by companies in their Corporate Social Responsibility Policies.
Schedule VII of the Act provides for a list of activities that may be considered as Corporate Social Responsibility (“CSR”) activities. Section 135 of the Act deals with CSR whereby companies (a) having a net worth of ₹500 Crore or more, or (b) having a turnover of ₹1000 Crore or more or (c) a net profit of more than ₹5 Crore during the any financial year are required to conduct CSR activities in accordance with the provisions of Schedule VII of the Act. If any such company fails to fulfil its CSR obligation and does not record the reasons for such failure, then the company will be liable under Section 134 with a fine ranging from ₹50,000 to ₹25 lakhs and each defaulting officer of the company is punishable with imprisonment which may extend upto 3 (Three) years and a fine ranging between ₹50 Thousand to ₹5 Lakhs.
Quick View:
In view of the recent natural disasters in India that have immensely affected large populations, this is a welcome move encouraging companies to fulfil their social responsibilities by contribution to disaster management and relief. All companies under the Act are free to formulate a CSR Policy including activities relating to eradicating hunger and poverty, promotion of education etc. mentioned under Schedule VII of the Act.
Section 135 of the Act stipulates that companies should give preference to the local area around it where it operates while making CSR contributions. Considering that a majority of the companies will not be located in areas that are affected by natural disasters, the MCA should make an exception to the same when it comes to the CSR contributions relating to disaster management, including relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities. Delhi HC restrains sixty platforms from audio streaming World Cup 2019
The Delhi High Court (“Delhi HC”), in the case of Channel 2 Group Corporation (“Channel 2”) v. MyCricketLive.Net & Ors (“My Cricket”)., passed an order restraining sixty online platforms from audio streaming the score updates of the ongoing ICC Cricket World Cup.
In the present case, the Channel 2 entered into an agreement with ICC Business Corporation FZ LLC, the organiser of ICC Men’s World Cup, 2019 whereby Channel 2 was conferred with exclusive rights related to audio streaming/broadcast of the cricket matches in different media/platforms.
Channel 2 submitted that My Cricket is an entity which includes several websites, private radio operators, internet/telecom service providers who could infringe Channel 2’s exclusive audio rights. Channel 2 approached the Delhi HC due to the apprehension that My Cricket was likely to violate Channel 2’s exclusive rights. This apprehension was based on the previous instances of intellectual property infringement that Channel 2 has suffered in the past. Channel 2 claimed that this has led to severe financial losses in the past.
Channel 2 also highlighted the unique nature of these online platforms encouraging piracy while making it difficult to identify their owners. Another concern was that since Channel 2 had exclusive rights to audio broadcast it would be illegal for the Defendants to audio stream the cricket matches online leaving Channel 2 with an irreparable injury.
The Court after hearing Channel 2’s concerns passed an ex-parte interim order restraining not only My Cricket, but other unidentified defendants from broadcasting/communication/transmitting to public the audio updates of the World Cup cricket matches. However, based on Star India Pvt. Ltd. V. Akuate Internet Services Pvt. Ltd, the Court also held that such defendants while complying with the interim order can relay the score update gratuitously after a time lag of 15 minutes from transmission of such updates.
Quick View:
In cases where the identity of the infringing party is unknown, due to the impending threat of loss/irreparable injury to the party having copyright, an interim injunction is granted by the courts nevertheless. Therefore, any online website/streaming service provider will be liable for streaming live/deferred score updates of cricket matches amounting to piracy without licenses. This is keeping in mind the large sums of money involved in granting such copyrights, particularly for the streaming of the popular game of cricket in India. Consequently, such licensees become vulnerable to huge losses from online piracy and must be protected.
However, it must be noted that a retransmission of the original broadcast can be done provided that there is a time lag of 15 minutes if such retransmission is provided free of cost.
DPIIT agrees to State’s request to extend deadline for Startup Ranking till September
The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (“DPIIT”) had launched the startup ranking framework in 2018 to rank the states and union territories depending on the successful implementation of their startup policies. The primary objectives were to foster competitiveness and make the states learn and replicate quality practices.
The second edition of the state-wise ranking was announced in February 2019. The states were expected to be assessed on their startup initiatives initially from May 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019.
However, it has been reported that due to overwhelming requests from several state governments, the DPIIT has extended the deadline for responses till the September 30, 2019. The DPIIT has mentioned will be no further extensions to the deadline.
Unlike the previous year’s framework, the ranking for 2019 will also take into consideration the size of the states as it is proportional to the effective implementation of the policies. The ranking framework will assess states on 7 pillars including (i) incubation support, (ii) institutional support, (iii) easing public procurement, (iv) seed funding support, (v) simplifying regulations, (vi) venture funding support, and (vii) on activities relating to outreach.
Quick View:
The ranking system enables states to discover their strengths with respect to initiatives already undertaken and identify the areas that they lack in comparison to other states. The competition only serves to boost the presence and proactive participation of the states in the startup ecosystem, and the ranking system goes a long way in providing the necessary variables.
Disclaimer: This post has been prepared for informational purposes only. The information/or observations contained in this post does not constitute legal advice and should not be acted upon in any specific situation without seeking proper legal advice from a practicing attorney.