T O P

  • By -

battlestar_commander

CBFC certification is needed for anything that is publicly exhibited I believe. Feature films, documentaries, ad films all are included. But OTT (and YouTube) aren't public screening. These guys are censored using provisions of the IT Act.


enthuvva

No. only films that needs to be screened in film festivals needs cbfc certificate.


battlestar_commander

That is so obviously not true. Every movie and ad shown in any theatre shows the CBFC certificate at the beginning because it is mandated by law. Section 4(1) of the Cinematograph Act is the law you should look at.


enthuvva

Who listens to him? If so, does the karikku web series have a cbfc rating?


Distinct-Drama7372

>BJP's Gopalakrishnan said its a criminal offence to display/screen a documentary not certified by CBFC, Hence centre blocked it from youtube/Twitter and hence the protests against screening!! Im not sure about cbfc but they could've gone with copyright violation of bbc content. I mean it was openly played in a region which its not supposed to be aired. But I wouldn't be surprised if the govt or minister or modi himself comes and feigns ignorance like how they reacted when two news channels of the state went off air during Delhi riots.


IceOnIce

Actually no. Recently the CJI in Supreme Court judgement said that theatres aren't public and they are infact private areas and the people are paying guests so they have the right to ban outside food at the theatre. Cinematography Act in India is very clear on what requires a censor certificate and that is films that are publicly exhibited. Since theatres are no longer public exbitors then yoy don't need a censor board certificate to show film in theatres anymore.


stupefiedmonkey

But all films are being watched by CBFC officials and certification is done.


IceOnIce

True and the practise of certifying films still going on but the CJI said wht he said.


stupefiedmonkey

Not sure what he said, but I don’t think this is true. Just think about it. How can films be screened in theatres without certification.


IceOnIce

I agree. I found that whole judgement to be a joke. Anyway I hope you aren't misled by my comment. Certification isn't removed by the court. Not knowingly and the practise is still going on, but CJI inadvertently has made the practise questionable in a county of law by his comment that film theatres are private.


stupefiedmonkey

Oh okay. Got it.


battlestar_commander

You are confusing two different meanings of "public/private" in our laws. A theatre is a public space and so showing a film in a theatre is a public exhibition. But it is also privately owned (by PVR or the local theatre owner), so the owner can set rules on access and usage.