The Supreme Court has intervened to stay contempt proceedings initiated by the Karnataka High Court against Netflix, the popular OTT (Over-the-Top) platform. The contempt proceedings were related to the streaming of the documentary 'Wild Karnataka', despite a prior judicial order restraining its release.

A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Satish Chandra Sharma took cognizance of Netflix's submissions and directed the high court to withhold the contempt proceedings against the OTT giant, at least temporarily.

The case stemmed from an interim order issued by the Karnataka High Court on June 29, 2021, in response to a petition filed by Ravindra N Redkar and Ullash Kumar. This order prohibited the filmmakers and platforms involved from any use, publication, or broadcast of the documentary and its raw footage obtained from the Karnataka Forest Department.

Allegations surfaced that Mudskipper Labs and ITV Studios Global, in collaboration with Kalyan Varma and Amoghavarsha, had entered into agreements with the Karnataka Forest Department for filming the documentary in 2014. However, it was claimed that they utilized KFD's services without payment and engaged Icon Films without KFD's knowledge.

The matter escalated when despite the court's interim order, the documentary was released in theaters and telecast on various platforms, prompting the contempt proceedings.

During the proceedings, Netflix, along with other respondents including BBC and Discovery, expressed willingness to compensate the Karnataka Forest Department for any damages incurred. BBC offered Rs 3.5 lakh, while Netflix offered Rs 4.5 lakh as compensation. Similar offers were made by Icon Films and Discovery.

However, the high court raised doubts about the sincerity of the apologies and compensation offers, deeming them potentially insincere in light of the compensation amounts offered.

The Supreme Court's intervention, staying the contempt proceedings against Netflix, reflects a nuanced consideration of the complexities involved in the case. The apex court noted the immediate removal of the contentious footage by Netflix and questioned the necessity of pursuing contempt charges against the OTT platform amidst its heavy caseload.

While the original petition remains pending before the Karnataka High Court, this development underscores the evolving landscape of digital content regulation and the intricacies involved in balancing artistic expression with legal obligations and environmental concerns.

The hearing in the high court has been adjourned until February 8, allowing for further deliberation on the matter.