Delhi HC Passes ‘Dynamic+ Injunction’ Restraining Rogue Websites From Streaming Present And Future Content Of Six American Studios

The Delhi High Court has passed a “dynamic+ injunction” order restraining various vogue websites from streaming the existing as well as future content of six American studios.

Justice Prathiba M Singh passed the ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of Universal City Studios LLC, Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc, Columbia Pictures Industries Inc., Netflix Studios LLC, Paramount Pictures Corporation and Disney Enterprises Inc, in their suit against the rogue websites.

“To keep pace with the dynamic nature of the infringement that is undertaken by hydra-headed websites, this Court has deemed it appropriate to issue this ‘Dynamic+ injunction’ to protect copyrighted works as soon as they are created, to ensure that no irreparable loss is caused to the authors and owners of copyrighted works, as there is an imminent possibility of works being uploaded on rogue websites or their newer versions immediately upon the films/shows/series etc,” the court said.

Justice Singh also permitted the American studios to implead any mirror or redirect or alphanumeric variations of the rogue websites and their associates in case such websites “merely provide new means of accessing the same primary infringing websites that have been injuncted.”

The court also directed the internet service providers to give effect to the injunction order by blocking the rogue websites. The Union Ministry of electronics, information and technology as well as the department of telecommunication is also directed to issue blocking orders against the websites.

“The Domain Name Registrars (DNRs) of the rogue websites’ domain names, upon being intimated by the Plaintiffs shall lock and suspend the said domain names. In addition, any details relating to the registrants of the said domain names including KYC, credit card, mobile number, etc. be also provided to the Plaintiffs,” the court ordered.

Justice Singh said that the rogue websites had the potential to curb creation of copyrighted content and “hurt the thriving content creation industry” in India and abroad as they offer unlicensed or unauthorised alternate platforms than those offered by the copyright owners themselves.

“Ignoring the existence of such rogue websites could result in curtailing and stifling creativity itself inasmuch as the creation of this content involves enormous investments and involves the collaborative work of various creative people such as authors, lyricists, singers, actors, dancers, musicians, support staff, extras etc. All these efforts and works would all be jeopardized if such pirated/unauthorised content is permitted to be available for users, that too at no cost or even minimal cost,” the court said.

It added that there is an imminent need to evolve a “global consensus” as despite the internet service providers blocking such websites, they can be accessed through VPN servers and other methods to which the long arm of the law cannot extend.

“In a usual case for copyright infringement, the Court firstly identifies the work, determines the Copyright of the Plaintiff in the said work, and thereafter grants an injunction. However, owing to the nature of the illegalities that rogue websites induldge in, there is a need to pass injunctions which are also dynamic qua the Plaintiffs as well, as it is seen that upon any film or series being released, they may be immediately uploaded on the rogue websites, causing severe and instant monetary loss,” the court said.

Observing that the copyright in future works comes into existence immediately upon the work being created, the court said that the American studios may not be able to approach court for each and every film or series that is produced in the future to secure an injunction against piracy.

“As innovation in technology continues, remedies to be granted also ought to be calibrated by Courts. This is not to say that in every case, an injunction qua future works can be granted. Such grant of an injunction would depend on the fact situation that arises and is placed before the Court,” the court said.

Case Title: UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS LLC. AND ORS. v. DOTMOVIES.BABY AND ORS.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 719

Click Here To Read Order