Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

21.7. Thereafter, the Plaintiff's anti-piracy team conducted investigations which revealed that Defendants No. 1 and 2 are the websites that are

4 "Licensed platform"

5 "Defendants' websites"

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/05/2024 at 20:45:11 providing the Plaintiff's series for free download. These Defendant's websites do not provide any contact details or take down mechanisms for infringing content, however, they mention that they will take down infringing links brought to their attention via email. Therefore, to protect its copyrights, the Plaintiff served a legal notice to Defendant No. 1 and 2's websites calling upon them to cease and desist from engaging in infringing activities and take down the Plaintiff's series from their websites. However, Defendant No. 1 and 2's websites have neither responded to the legal notices, nor taken down the Plaintiff's series from their websites. It is pertinent to note that after filing the present suit, the Plaintiff came across additional mirror/redirect/alphanumeric variations of Defendant No. 2's website and other websites which are exploiting the Plaintiff's series. These additional websites are arrayed as Defendants No. 14 to 19. 21.8. This Court vide judgment dated 10th April, 2019 passed in UTV Software Communications Ltd. v. 1337x.to and Ors., [CS(COMM) 724 of 2017]6, has recognized the parameters for determining rogue websites and granted a 'dynamic injunction' exercising its inherent powers under Section 151 of the CPC to allow the Plaintiff to implead additional websites under Order I Rule 10 of CPC by delegating the power to adjudicate on the impleadment of additional websites to an existing blocking order, to the Joint Registrar of this Hon'ble Court. Since the facts of the present case fulfil the test laid down in the UTV Order for identifying rogue websites, considering that there is a rampant increase in the usage of rogue websites for facilitating piracy of the Plaintiff's content, there is an urgent need for injunction in the present case.

22. The Court has considered the afore-noted facts, submissions and documents placed on record by the Plaintiff. It is clear that the Plaintiff is the lawful owner of the copyrights in the series "UNDEKHI" and which is licensed to be available on the platform "SonyLIV". Further, on a prima facie assessment, it is observed that the Defendant's websites host content which is otherwise exclusively available on established licensed streaming platforms. Given the fact that the Plaintiff's series is currently available for free viewing and download on the Defendants' websites without being authorised or licensed, the said websites are engaged in piracy of content.