Rule 75 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Rule 75 is the copyright takedown procedure in the Rules. An owner who finds an infringing copy being stored for electronic links, access or integration can send a written complaint to the person facilitating that storage. The rule sets what the complaint must contain, a 36-hour response, a 21-day window for the owner to get a court order, a notice for users, and what happens if no order arrives. The rule is printed without a heading.
An owner of copyright (or exclusive licensee) sends a written complaint to the person who facilitated the transient or incidental storage, with six particulars, including an undertaking to sue and produce a court order within twenty-one days. If satisfied the copy is infringing, that person acts within thirty-six hours and holds back access for twenty-one days or until a court order, whichever is earlier, displaying a notice. If no order is produced, access may be restored, and the person need not answer further notices on the same work in the same location.
Which section the rule serves
Rule 75 implements section 52(1)(c) of the Act, the exception for transient or incidental storage of a work. See our guide to exceptions to infringement under section 52. The rule is the complaint mechanism for storage of that kind; it is not a general infringement suit. For a longer form of notice, see our draft notice to an online platform. If you need a takedown complaint drafted, our legal notice drafting team can prepare it against the six particulars.
Rule 75(1): who complains, and to whom
"Any owner of copyright may give a complaint in writing under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 52, to a person who has facilitated transient or incidental storage of work for providing electronic links, access or integration to restrain from such storage of work."
The complainant is the owner; sub-rule (2)(b) widens this to an exclusive licensee. The recipient is "a person who has facilitated" the storage. The complaint must be in writing. The text does not say how it is to be delivered.
Rule 75(2): the six particulars
| Item | The written complaint must contain |
|---|---|
| (a) | Description of the work with adequate information to identify it |
| (b) | Details establishing that the complainant is the owner or exclusive licensee of copyright in the work |
| (c) | Details establishing that the copy stored is an infringing copy of the complainant's work and that the allegedly infringing act is not covered under section 52 or any other act permitted by the Act |
| (d) | Details of the location where the storage is taking place |
| (e) | Details of the person, if known, responsible for uploading the infringing work |
| (f) | An undertaking that the complainant shall file an infringement suit in the competent court against the uploader and produce the court's orders within twenty-one days from receipt of the notice |
Drafting slip. Item (c) repeats a phrase ("the matter of transient or incidental storage is an infringing copy") in the printed text. The sense is clear.
Item (c) is a heavy duty: the complainant must show that the use is not within section 52 or any other permitted act. A complaint that does not deal with that point is incomplete as worded. Item (f) is the commitment that makes the 21-day clock work.
Rule 75(3): the 36-hour and 21-day periods
"On receipt of the written complaint, the person responsible for the storage of the copy, if satisfied from the details provided in the complaint that the copy of the work is an infringed copy, within thirty-six hours, take measures to refrain from facilitating such access for a period of twenty-one days from the date of receipt of the complaint or till he receives an order from the competent court restraining him from facilitating access whichever is earlier."
| Period | What it does |
|---|---|
| Thirty-six hours | The time within which the recipient, if satisfied, takes measures to stop facilitating access |
| Twenty-one days from receipt of the complaint | The maximum period of restraint, unless a court order arrives earlier |
| Court order | If the recipient receives an order from the competent court restraining him, that order governs |
The duty to act depends on the recipient being "satisfied from the details provided in the complaint". The rule gives the recipient a judgment to make. It does not say who decides whether the recipient was right, nor what follows if the recipient refuses.
Rule 75(4) to (6): notice, restoration and repeat complaints
Sub-rule (4). The person responsible for storage "shall display a notice giving reasons for restraining such access to persons requesting for access to the alleged infringing copy."
Sub-rule (5). The person "may restore the storage of the work in case the complainant failed to produce the orders of the competent court having jurisdiction, restraining him from facilitating access."
Sub-rule (6). If the complainant fails to produce the orders "within the stipulated period, the person responsible for storage shall not be obliged to respond to any further notice sent by the same complainant on the same work in the same location."
| Outcome | Effect |
|---|---|
| Court order produced within 21 days | Restraint continues as the court orders |
| No court order in the period | Storage may be restored (sub-rule 5) |
| Repeat notice, same complainant, same work, same location | No obligation to respond (sub-rule 6) |
Sub-rule (5) says "may", so restoration is permitted, not compelled. Sub-rule (6) is limited to the same complainant, the same work and the same location; a complaint about a different location is not caught.
An example
Kavita Joshi owns the copyright in a photo series and finds an unauthorised copy on a file-sharing page hosted by a platform. She sends the platform a written complaint describing the series, attaching her proof of ownership and her authorship, explaining why the use is not covered by section 52, giving the page address, naming the uploader if known, and undertaking to sue and produce a court order within twenty-one days. The platform, satisfied, disables access within thirty-six hours and shows a notice. Kavita files a suit and obtains an order within the period, so the restraint continues. Had she not, the platform could restore the page and would not need to answer a second notice about the same photo on the same page.
What rule 75 does not say
- No form, address or electronic channel for the complaint.
- No definition of "person who has facilitated" or "competent court".
- No consequence if the recipient is not satisfied and does nothing.
- No remedy for the uploader who says the restraint was wrongful.
- No fee in the Second Schedule for this complaint.
- The rule does not mention the Board.
Need help drafting a takedown complaint?
A rule 75 complaint stands or falls on its particulars, especially the proof of ownership, the section 52 point and the undertaking to sue. Our legal notice drafting team can prepare the complaint and plan the follow-up suit.
Key takeaways
- Rule 75 is the written-complaint procedure for transient or incidental storage under section 52(1)(c).
- The complaint has six particulars, including an undertaking to sue and produce a court order within twenty-one days.
- The recipient, if satisfied, acts within thirty-six hours and restrains access for up to twenty-one days or until a court order.
- A notice must be displayed; with no order, access may be restored; repeat notices on the same work and location need no answer.
- The text is as notified in 2013 with the 2016 amendment; check later amendments.
Read next
- Rule 76–78: organizations for persons with disabilities, records, notice and contracts
- Rules 73–74: inspection of register and copies and extracts
- Copyright infringement on social media: legal remedies
Disclaimer: Based on the Copyright Rules, 2013 as notified (with the 2016 amendment), read with the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, as consulted on 1 October 2026. Later amendment rules, forms and fees should be checked in their current form. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.