The Madras High Court on Thursday dismissed a petition filed by the Tamil Film Active Producers Association (TFAPA) seeking a ban on online movie reviews during the first three days of a film’s release, firmly asserting that such a restriction would violate the fundamental right to free speech and expression.
Justice N. Seshasayee, presiding over the matter, observed that enforcing such a ban would not only be “unsustainable” but also practically impossible in today’s digital age, where content circulates instantly across borders. “Even if the relief were granted, it would be impossible to implement,” the court stated, according to Live Law.
Free Speech Trumps Industry Concerns
Highlighting that movie reviews fall within the ambit of free expression, the court pointed out the constitutional safeguard under Article 19(1)(a). “If judges can be criticised on social media, filmmakers must also accept criticism—positive or negative,” the judge noted, adding that public feedback, even harsh or unfavorable, cannot be selectively controlled.
Justice Seshasayee also referred to the changing landscape of entertainment consumption, acknowledging the growing dominance of OTT platforms and viewers’ ability to make independent judgments about films. “People can decide for themselves whether a movie is good or not,” the court remarked.
The Producers’ Argument
TFAPA had contended that the surge in online platforms had led to an increase in both legitimate and malicious criticism. The association alleged that some YouTube channels engaged in “review bombing” — a practice where coordinated negative reviews are disseminated to damage a film’s reputation, sometimes due to personal grudges or business rivalries.
While TFAPA acknowledged the role of authentic criticism in fostering healthy cinematic discourse, it raised concerns over so-called ‘reviewers’ using derogatory language purely to boost their subscriber count.
Court Rebuffs Censorship Attempt
The court, however, was unconvinced by the plea for pre-emptive censorship. It emphasized that freedom of speech includes the right to comment, critique, and express opinions — even if those opinions may impact commercial interests.
With this ruling, the High Court has reinforced a clear precedent: while criticism may sting, it is not a ground for silencing public discourse, especially in an era where digital platforms have become the new town squares for expression.
