Author- Senorita Shelton, Rizvi law College
ABSTRACT
Humour has always been used as a tool against oppression. Internet memes have become more well-known since the introduction of digital technologies. Memes are platforms that use humour and sarcasm to convey information; they have evolved from light-hearted jokes to powerful tools for commentary, advertising, and expression. Memes from the internet are often used in political campaigns. This article examines the ways in which political satire has been disseminated via internet memes. Their widespread use raises serious legal concerns, especially in relation to intellectual property rights (IPR). The relationship between memes, copyright, and the right to free speech and expression is examined in this article, which also clarifies the differences between fair use and copyright infringement.
INTRODUCTION
The online medium of political memes has become a formidable force in India. Why? Politics messages are not limited to humorous sketches, but rather have the ability to sway public opinion, ridicule adversaries on social media, advocate for specific legislation, or offer insight into complex issues. Memes have become a popular form of expression for Southeast Asia, where more than 60% of the population is below 35 years old, as individuals use them to express their political opinions and establish their own identities. Although they began as simple satire or a way to make fun of old school children into young adults, these pages have developed into niche political messages sites that are used almost exclusively for cross-party propaganda online. This represents 21st-century online politics. The meme wars have seen the participation of Instagram, Twitter (now X), WhatsApp, and Sharechat. Quick creation of content is common among political parties, their IT departments, internet influencers (including freelance meme creators), and political party bosses during election seasons, protests, and significant policy announcement. When they’re powered by popular pages or tied to trending hashtags, memes can quickly and widely spread on the internet. The increasing prevalence of political memes on social media as an engaging and extensively shared form of political information that influences people’s political views and behaviours
LEGAL JARGON
1. Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution
The Indian Constitution’s Article 19(1)(a) protects the right to free speech and expression, which is a cornerstone of the country’s democracy. It provides individuals the freedom to express their thoughts, feelings and convictions without excessive restrictions. However, this right is not absolute, as Article 19(2) introduces reasonable limitations for reasons including national integrity, public morality, security, and the prevention of defamation or incitement. According to this framework, information that veers into obscenity, defamatory attacks, or incitement to violence may rightfully be restricted, even though the use of memes t express humour or criticism is typically protected. Crucially, there is a high hurdle for restricting political expression; discomfort, embarrassment, or ridicule caused to public figures does not by itself justify curtailment of speech. Social and electronic media’s digital revolution has significantly reshaped the definition of this right, igniting scholarly discussions on its scope, limitations, and the regulatory tools required. In Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950), the Supreme Court acknowledged that political satire, parody, and criticism of public leaders are fundamental to this freedom, stating that free political speech is crucial to democracy. As a contemporary digital tool for political commentary, memes are thus covered by the right to free speech guaranteed by the constitution.
2. Section 2(c) of The Copyright Act, 1957
Most memes legally violate copyright infringement, since they use copyrighted material without authorization. However, this does not necessarily mean they are unlawful, even when they technically violate the law. fair use is relevant in this situation. The majority of memes are either: Original works (sketches, screenshots or edits) or edited from pre-existing pictures (movie and celebrity photos). Under Section 2(c) of The Copyright Act, 1957, photographs and changed images are deemed as ‘artistic works’. This means that original memes created by an author such as a cartoon or satirical image are entitled to copyright protection as work of art. Since the original image is likewise protected by section 2(c), distributing of another person’s photograph or screenshot without their consent could be a breach of their copyright. If a comedian or a content creator uses a picture they took and their own words to create an original meme, that meme is considered as their work under 2(c), and are entitled to copyright. However even when the caption id funny or transformative, if a person takes a photographs of a still from a movie (e.g., from Squid Games) and adds a witty caption to it to create a meme, the original still is protected by copyright and using it could be against the owner’s rights.
THE PROOF
1. The Information Technology Act of 2000 establishes India’s legal framework for regulating digital expression which lays down rules for cyber offenses and platform responsibilities. The Act lays down provisions for cyber offences as well as the duties and liabilities of intermediaries such as social media companies while the IT Act does not directly address political satire or intellectual property concerns, it indirectly regulates meme-based campaigns by defining the boundaries of acceptable online expression and by imposing responsibilities on digital intermediaries to act against unlawful content.
2. The Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act of 1995, together with guidelines from the Press Council of India and the NBDSA, attempt to promote ethical broadcasting standards. The Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 lays down a programme code to ensure that content broadcast through television does not offend decency, morality, or public order, and these standards are often extended by analogy to digital platforms that disseminate political content. Similarly, the Press Council of India, through its journalistic ethics guidelines, and the News Broadcasting & Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA), through its self-regulatory code, seek to promote fairness, accuracy, and accountability in news and political communication. While these bodies and legislations do not directly regulate memes, they create a normative framework for ethical expression and act as reference points when determining the permissible boundaries of political satire and commentary in the media ecosystem. Despite these efforts, the implementation of such laws often faces scrutiny for being politically coloured and uneven, raising concerns about misuse aimed at silencing government critics. Unlike traditional publishers, social platforms operate as intermediaries and hence are not held directly responsible for user-generated content.
3. The updated 2021 Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code introduced compliance mandates such as grievance redressal mechanisms, appointment of compliance officers, and message traceability, all of which have stirred privacy-related concerns. Intermediaries are also mandated to remove unlawful content within a specified time frame once they receive actual knowledge or a valid complaint, covering issues such as defamation, obscenity, or threats to public order. For digital news media and online curated content providers, the Rules impose a three-tier regulatory framework consisting of self-regulation, oversight by industry bodies, and government monitoring.
CASE LAWS
1. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
The Court declared that the Information Technology Act of 2000’s Section 66A, which forbade the dissemination of offensive materials via communication services, was unconstitutional. Since the clause was ambiguous and expansive, it was determined that Article 19(1)(a) unfairly curtailed the right to free speech, which was a violation. According to the Court, speech limitations cannot be justified by arbitrary judgments of offensiveness or inconvenience and must fall within the parameters of Article 19(2). In order to protect users’ right to free speech online, the ruling further restricted the scope of intermediaries’ liability under Section 79, requiring that websites only be held responsible for material removal upon obtaining a court order or government notification. Shreya Singhal applies the concept that political satire and criticism cannot be restrained solely for the purpose of causing offense or embarrassment to public figures, as she advocates for its use in meme-based political campaigns.
2.Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994)
The US Supreme Court’s ruling in this case acknowledged parody as a valid form of fair use even when it had a commercial element, is a noteworthy comparable precedent. The Court ruled that parody is essentially transformative since it offers new meaning and social value while also commenting on the original work. This idea is particularly relevant to political campaigns that rely on memes, as copyrighted content is frequently used to criticize prominent people or policies. The ruling highlights the general idea that intellectual property rights must give way when their execution would unnecessarily suppress political speech and satire by confirming that parody has greater protection under the law of free expression. In the context of India, although the doctrine of fair use is narrower under the Copyright Act, 1957, the logic of Campbell provides persuasive value in arguing that memes should be viewed as transformative political expression rather than as unlawful infringements.
CONCLUSION
The cultural currency of the internet is memes, which are shared instantly, remixed, and never attributed. However, a jumble of legal threads lies behind every viral meme. Memes are typically a legal conundrum because, while freedom of expression allows for satire and criticism, copyright protects creative creations. Although Indian copyright law provides some protection, these frameworks are typically left behind by the rapid evolution of digital culture. Because of problems like anonymity, cross-border sharing, platform inequalities, and the rise of artificial intelligence, regulating memes is a difficult undertaking. The majority of memes are currently in a legal limbo, relying more on societal norms than on court rulings. Legislators, creators, and platforms will need to work together as the internet continues to evolve in order to find a balance that respects innovation and ownership without stifling free expression, criticism, or humour. Ultimately, memes may be amusing, but they have serious legal ramification which are anything but not a joke.
FAQ’s
1.What is a meme?
– A meme is a digital piece of content—typically an image, video, or phrase—that has been modified or combined with text to express criticism, satire, or humour. Due to their easy relatability and shareability, memes proliferate quickly on social media platforms. Memes are frequently used in political contexts to make fun of public persons, criticize policies, and sway public opinion in an approachable and amusing manner. They serve as a contemporary means of digital communication and expression.
2. What is a meme-based political campaign?
– In a meme-based political campaign, political messages, ideas, or criticisms are disseminated through the usage of memes. They frequently make complex subjects more relatable to the general population by being amusing or satirical. Political opinions are influenced by these campaigns, which are extensively disseminated on social media.
3. Can memes violate intellectual property rights?
-Yes, memes often use copyrighted images, videos, or logos without permission, which can raise issues of copyright or trademark infringement. However, many memes are defended as transformative works, especially when they add satire, humour, or political critique. Courts often balance IP rights with free speech to decide such cases.
