>

Copyright is a government concept.
The government can make the law whatever they want to apply criminal or civil penalties for hosting this. There is no “higher level” than the national government, regardless of what you may think of the UN.
So copyright itself isn’t the issue, the government intervention is. How laws interact across countries is a fun area, India may declare it illegal in their country, but that should not impact someone in neighboring China. So Internet Archive taking it down everywhere because that’s what India wants is kind of a problem.
Wasn't surprised to see Musk take it off Twitter, since he has no idea what he's doing.
But disappointing that the Internet Archive folded. Why? >

I’m no expert but could it have been a copyright violation for it to be on there? I remember reading a book on the Internet Archive that happened to be out of print some years ago, and apparently it had been removed from the site while I was in the middle of reading it. I assumed they got a cease and desist letter and didn’t want to get sued. >

That's a good theory. But it's the Indian government who objects to this documentary and demanded that it be taken down; it's not a copyright question in this case. >

The government is objecting but if they can object on copyright grounds I am sure they would.