Abstract
The core issue of this case is related to the concept of intermediary liability. The IT Act, 2000 provides protection to the intermediaries under Section 79 , which is also referred to as the safe harbour provision. The safe harbour provision has its own ambiguities revolving around its application and limitation, which are exacerbated in this dynamic e-commerce landscape. As the e-platforms transform from passive conduits to active participants who facilitate trade, the difference between intermediary and marketplace becomes blurry. In this case of Christian Louboutin SAS v. Nakul Bajaj , the Court discussed the role of intermediaries in trademark infringement. They discussed how the platforms are functioning as interface entities, shaping consumer perception and influencing purchasing decisions, and therefore going beyond being mere facilitators. The Hon’ble Court in this judgment provided new judicial guidance, and this commentary will critically analyse intermediary liability through the lens of this judgment.
Keywords – Safe Harbour Provision, Section 79 of IT Act, Intermediary Liability, role of interfaces