Delhi High Court Orders Blocking Of 34 Rogue Websites Indulging In Online Piracy By Streaming Content Of Universal, Netflix, Disney Etc

The Delhi High Court has ordered for blocking of 34 rogue websites indulging in online piracy by streaming streaming content of Universal City Studios LLC., Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc., Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc., Netflix Studios, LLC, Paramount Pictures Corporation and Disney Enterprises, Inc, through illegal means.

Justice Asha Menon directed the Department of Telecommunications and Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to issue notifications calling upon the telecom service providers registered under them to disable access into India of the said websites within 36 hours.

The Court also directed the Internet Service Providers to block access to the rogue websites.

"Yet there is no gainsaying that these websites are actively streaming motion pictures and television content of the plaintiffs through illegal means. The legal notices issued to them have evoked no response. Such illegal websites made with the primary and sole objective to pirate copyrighted works for their own commercial benefits cannot be permitted to continue doing so, to await the disposal of the suit," the Court said.

The suit was filed by the six plaintiffs seeking permanent injunction restraining 34 defendants websites from hosting, streaming, reproducing, distributing, making available to the public or communicating to the public, or facilitating the same, on their websites, any content in relation to which they had copyright.

Advocate Saikrishna Rajagopal appearing for the plaintiffs sought an interim direction to block access to the rogue websites as by the continuous infringement of the copyright of their creative work like various movies including Mulan, Lego Batman, Finding Nemo, Finding Dory, Aquaman, Wonder Woman, San Andreas and Joker and TV Series such as Mob Psycho, Friends, Stranger Things, Sacred Games, Jojo's Bizarre Adventures and Arrow etc., immense loss was being caused to the plaintiffs.

"The defendants No.1 to 34 have been created to upload pirated movies, TV programmes etc. These websites are anonymous in nature. The information provided in the public domain regarding the owners of the websites is inherently incorrect or protected behind the veil of secrecy and hidden behind private domain services offered by various domain name Registrars. Therefore, there is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the plaintiffs that it is virtually impossible to bring the owners of these websites before the court and to ensure that the orders are complied with," the Court said.

The plaintiffs also submitted that the suit was maintainable as the they had been affected by the rogue websites on account of the unlawful streaming of their creative and original work and thus, there were common facts and questions of law involved.

It was argued that since the plaintiffs were aggrieved by the same act or series of acts, on the basis of which the copyrights in their works were being infringed by the rogue websites, the suit was maintainable also in terms of Order I Rule 1(a) CPC and that bringing separate suits would only add to the burden of the court.

"This Court is unable to accept the submissions made. The plaintiffs are different corporate entities. They may have a common grievance against the defendants for uploading and streaming their copyrighted work without authority or license, but the similarity in reliefs claimed against the defendants would not suffice for the plaintiffs to join hands in a single action," the Court said.

Further observing that there was no identity of copyright, the work, the infringement of each work of the plaintiffs by each one of the defendants, the Court said that the requirements of Order I Rule 1(a) & (b) CPC were not met and that all of the plaintiffs could not join in one suit, even against a similar set of defendants.

"Ultimately, in the present set of matters, if the court were to direct the plaintiffs to file separate plaints in view of the observations hereinabove, since the reliefs claimed are against the same set of defendants, namely, of injunction against them, restraining them from violating the copyrights of each of the plaintiffs, in their various creative works and if some commonality of evidence is disclosed, this Court would not be powerless to direct consolidation of the suits for trial and disposal at a subsequent stage," it added.

Accordingly, the Court directed the plaint to be registered as suit and issued summons in the same.

"List before the Joint Registrar on 10th May, 2022, for completion of service and pleadings," the Court ordered.

Title: UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS LLC. & ORS. v. 123MOVIESHUB.TC & ORS.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 139

Click Here To Read Order