A YouTuber has shared a legal notice from the team behind Yash and Geetu Mohandas’ Toxic after posting a review of the film. The review remains online despite the notice.
The legal controversy surrounding Yash-starrer Toxic: A Fairy Tale for Grown-Ups has intensified, with YouTuber Suraj Kumar revealing that he received a legal notice over his review of the film.
The development comes a day after Toxic released in theatres and amid an existing Bengaluru court injunction restricting the publication or circulation of false or defamatory content about the film.
YouTuber shares legal notice over Toxic review
Suraj Kumar posted a screenshot of an email on X, stating that he had received the notice from Bengaluru-based Aiplex Software Private Limited.
The company said it was acting on behalf of KVN Monster Mind Creations LLP, described in the notice as the producer and copyright owner of Toxic.
The notice alleged that content concerning the film had been “published, circulated, shared, posted and/or otherwise communicated” through digital or online media. The URL identified in the notice was reportedly linked to Kumar’s review.
However, the review video was still available to viewers at the time of the report.
Sharing the notice on X, Kumar wrote: “Thank You Team #Toxic For the Legal Notice on My Review.”
What powers does Aiplex have?
According to the authorisation letter shared with the YouTuber, Aiplex has been authorised to issue legal notices, takedown notices, de-indexing and blocking requests, as well as compliance communications concerning the film.
The authorisation reportedly covers actions involving intermediaries, internet service providers, search engines, domain registrars, channel owners, hosting providers and online platforms.
The authorisation period mentioned in the letter runs from July 13 to September 26.
Aiplex has previously been involved in similar disputes involving online film criticism. Telugu YouTuber Sushant, who operates the Barbell Pitch Meetings channel, had earlier accused the company of using copyright strikes and legal notices in ways that temporarily suppressed critical reviews.
What did the Bengaluru court order say?
According to PTI, the Additional City Civil and Sessions Court in Bengaluru passed an ex parte temporary injunction on August 22 in a case filed by the film’s production house.
The order restrains the publication or circulation of false or defamatory content concerning Toxic. The defendants include X Corp and a “John Doe” defendant representing unidentified individuals who may publish such material.
Importantly, the injunction is temporary and is scheduled to remain in force until the next hearing on September 28, subject to the conditions imposed by the court.
The court also stated that the injunction cannot be used for purposes other than those for which it was granted. It further noted that failure by the plaintiff to comply with the conditions could result in the injunction being vacated.
Does the order ban negative reviews?
The distinction between criticism and defamatory content is central to the controversy.
The court order, as described, concerns false or defamatory content rather than automatically prohibiting all negative opinions about the film. A critical review expressing an opinion is not necessarily the same as a defamatory factual allegation.
The legal notice received by Kumar, however, demonstrates how the court proceedings and the film’s efforts to protect its reputation are now intersecting with online reviews published after the theatrical release.
Toxic releases to mixed response
Toxic: A Fairy Tale for Grown-Ups, directed by Geetu Mohandas and produced by Venkat K Narayana and Yash, released in theatres on Wednesday.
The film features Yash in dual roles and also stars Kiara Advani, Nayanthara, Huma Qureshi, Tara Sutaria and Rukmini Vasanth.
While the film has generated considerable attention because of its cast and scale, it has received a mixed response from critics and audiences.
The legal notice to a YouTuber has now added another layer to the conversation surrounding the film, raising questions about the boundaries between film criticism, reputation protection and online speech.
