Sporta Technologies Pvt. Ltd vs John Doe And Others on 9 June, 2021

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sporta Technologies Pvt. Ltd vs John Doe And Others on 9 June, 2021

Bench: Amit Bansal

$~21
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+    CS(COMM) 291/2021
     SPORTA TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.                      ..... Plaintiff
                    Through: Ms.Shwetasree Majumdar, Mr.Prithvi
                             Singh and Ms. Pritika Kohli,
                             Advocates
                    versus
     JOHN DOE AND OTHERS                          ..... Defendants
                    Through: Mr. Tushar Bhardwaj, Advocate for
                             D-6.
                             Mr. Azhar Qayum, Advocate for D-8.
                             Mr. Moazzam Khan and Mr. Alipak
                             Banerjee, Advocates for D-14.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
              ORDER

%             09.06.2021
[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

I.As. No.7488/2021 & 7489/2021(both for exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The applications stand disposed of.

I.A. No. 7490/2021 (for exemption from filing court fees)

3. Subject to the plaintiff depositing the amount of Court Fees within one week from today, the time for depositing court fees is extended by a week.

4. The application stands disposed of.

I.A. No. 7487/2021 (u/O. XI R. 1(4) CPC)

5. For the reasons stated, the plaintiff is permitted to file additional documents latest with the replication, if any.

6. The application stands disposed of.

CS(COMM) 291/2021 Page 1 of 5

CS(COMM) 291/2021 & I.A. No. 7486/2021 (u/O. XXXIX R. 1&2)

7. The present suit has been filed for permanent injunction against the defendants restraining infringement of plaintiff's broadcast reproduction rights, and other ancillary reliefs.

8. The plaintiff is the proprietor of multi-support aggregator platform called FanCode, which streams a variety of live sporting matches on the basis of licensing arrangements with sporting bodies and TV channels. The plaintiff is the owner of the broadcast reproduction rights in respect of South African cricket tour of West Indies in 2021, in terms of Section 37 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957. It is stated that the defendant No. 1 (whose identity is not known and therefore designated as John Doe) is infringing and commercially misappropriating the said rights by hosting, streaming, broadcasting, making available for viewing, providing access to, and communicating to the public, pirated content on domains and specific URLs of third party websites enumerated in paragraphs 11 and 13 of the application filed by the plaintiff.

9. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.

10. Let summons be issued in the suit to the defendants. Counsels for the defendants No. 6, 8 and 14 accept summons. Summons be now sent to the remaining defendants by all modes including e-mail. The summons so issued to the defendants would indicate that the written statement be positively filed within four weeks. Replication, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

11. List before the Joint Registrar for completion of service and pleadings on 28th September, 2021.

12. Let notice be issued to the defendants on the application. Counsels for CS(COMM) 291/2021 Page 2 of 5 the defendants No. 6, 8 and 14 accept notice. Notice be now sent to the remaining defendants by all modes including e-mail.

13. Reply may be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, within two weeks thereafter.

14. List on 25th August, 2021.

15. The counsels for defendants No. 6, 8 and 14 have no objection to the passing of the ex-parte ad interim order as sought by the plaintiff. However, Mr. Khan appearing on behalf of the defendant No. 14 states that he has reservations with regard to prayer (iii) in the present application and he opposes any directions being passed in respect of any other website that may be subsequently identified by the plaintiff as infringing its broadcast reproduction rights, without judicial scrutiny.

16. Keeping in view the aforesaid, this Court is of the opinion that a prima facie case of infringement of its broadcast reproduction rights is made out in favour of the plaintiff. Balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendant No.1 and irreparable harm or injury will be caused to the plaintiff if the reliefs are not granted since the upcoming South Africa cricket tour of West Indies, 2021 commences on 10th June, 2021.

17. Consequently, till the next date of hearing,

(i) defendant No. 1, his partners, officers, servants, employees, and all others acting for and on their behalf, or anyone claiming through them in any manner, are restrained from making available to the public, any content which results in an infringement of the plaintiff's broadcast reproduction rights whether on its application Thop TV or in any other manner;

CS(COMM) 291/2021 Page 3 of 5

(ii) defendant Nos. 2 to 10 are directed to block access to the ten websites of defendant No. 1 listed in paragraph 11 of the application as well as the URLs listed in paragraph 13 of the application, which are providing the Thop TV mobile application/APK for download in India and/or any other website/URL that may subsequently be identified by the plaintiff as infringing its broadcast reproduction rights; and,

(iii) the defendant No. 11 are directed to issue a notification calling upon the various internet and telecom service providers registered under it to block access to the websites of defendant No. 1, listed in paragraph 11 of the application as well as the URLs listed in paragraph 13 of the plaint which are providing the Thop TV mobile application/APK for download in India and/or any other website/ URL that may subsequently be identified by the Plaintiff as infringing its broadcast reproduction rights.

18. In respect to prayer (iii) as sought by the plaintiff in the present application, counsel for the defendant No. 14 has screen-shared and subsequently e-mailed the order passed by this Court dated 19th April, 2021 in I.A. No.5684/2021 in CS(COMM) 151/2021 titled as Star India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. y1.mylivecricket.biz and judgment dated 10th April, 2019 in CS(COMM) 724/2017 titled as UTV Software Communications Ltd. Vs. 1337x.to, in terms of which omnibus orders with regard to block of website, that may be identified by the plaintiff may not be passed without judicial scrutiny.

19. On the other hand, counsel for the plaintiff has also relied upon order dated 27th May, 2019 in I.A. No.7884/2019 in CS(COMM) 281/2019 titled as Star India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. indianpremierleague2015.com wherein in similar facts and circumstances, it was observed as under:

CS(COMM) 291/2021 Page 4 of 5

"15. If there are any other websites which are found to be illegally streaming the ICC World Cup 2019 matches, the Plaintiffs are permitted to approach Defendants No.27 and 28 to seek blocking orders, which, if passed, shall be implemented by Defendants No.18 to 26."

20. I have considered the submissions. At an ex-parte ad interim stage, keeping in mind that the plaintiff cannot be expected to approach the Court every time it comes across a new infringing website, and also considering that the cricket series is commencing on 10th June, 2021, till the next date of hearing, the defendants 12 to 17 are directed to suspend access to domains of the defendant No. 1 listed in paragraph 11 of the application as well as any other domains that may subsequently be identified by the plaintiff as infringing its broadcast reproduction rights. In respect of any such domain which may be identified by the plaintiff subsequently, the plaintiff shall file an affidavit before this Court within one week of such identification.

21. Compliance of Order XXXIX Rule 3 CPC may be done within one week by e-mail to all the defendants.

(AMIT BANSAL) VACATION JUDGE JUNE 9, 2021/A CS(COMM) 291/2021 Page 5 of 5

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders