+91 44 28120000

Call Us for an Appointment

Concept of Dynamic Injunctions and an overview of landmark Cases Shaping Dynamic Injunctions in India

SURANA & SURANA > அறிவுசார் சொத்து உரிமைகள்  > Concept of Dynamic Injunctions and an overview of landmark Cases Shaping Dynamic Injunctions in India

Concept of Dynamic Injunctions and an overview of landmark Cases Shaping Dynamic Injunctions in India

P. Saranya, Senior Associate, IP Practice


The proliferation of digital technology has revolutionized the way we consume and distribute content. However, with this advancement, digital piracy has also become a pervasive issue, posing significant challenges to creators, copyright holders, and the entertainment industry at large. In India, combating digital piracy has been a priority, and one of the legal tools that has gained prominence in recent years is the concept of dynamic injunctions. This article delves into the legal framework surrounding dynamic injunctions in India, analysing landmark cases that have shaped this approach to combat digital piracy.

I. Understanding Digital Piracy in India

Digital piracy refers to the unauthorized copying, distribution, or sharing of copyrighted content, such as music, movies, software, books, and more. It can take various forms, including torrenting, file-sharing, streaming, and direct downloading, often resulting in significant financial losses for copyright owners. In India, digital piracy is a pressing issue, primarily due to the widespread availability of high-speed internet and the increasing accessibility of digital content.

II. Legal Framework in India

To address digital piracy, India has established a robust legal framework, including the Copyright Act, 1957, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and various judicial interpretations. However, combating piracy in the digital age requires innovative solutions, leading to the emergence of dynamic injunctions as a powerful legal tool.

III. Dynamic Injunctions: An Overview

Dynamic injunctions are a legal remedy that allows copyright holders to combat digital piracy swiftly and effectively. Unlike traditional injunctions that are static and limited to specific websites or platforms, dynamic injunctions are dynamic in nature, adapting to the evolving digital landscape. They empower copyright holders to block access to infringing websites, apps or platforms, regardless of their domain or IP address changes. This flexibility is crucial in countering the constantly evolving tactics employed by digital pirates.

IV. Landmark Cases Shaping Dynamic Injunctions in India

A. UTV Software Communications Ltd. v. 1337x.to and Others

In the case of UTV Software Communications Ltd. v. 1337x.to and Others, the Delhi High Court issued a dynamic injunction against several torrent websites, including 1337x.to, to prevent the illegal distribution of copyrighted Bollywood films. The court recognized the need for dynamic injunctions to effectively combat digital piracy and prevent infringing websites from simply migrating to new domain names or IP addresses. This case set a precedent for granting dynamic injunctions in India.

B. Eros International Media Ltd. v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

In the case of Eros International Media Ltd. v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd, the Delhi High Court granted a dynamic injunction against Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd (BSNL), a major Indian telecommunications company. BSNL was ordered to block access to infringing websites in real-time. This decision emphasized the importance of involving internet service providers (ISPs) in the fight against digital piracy through dynamic injunctions.

C. Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. UOI & Others

The case of Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. UOI & Others involved Disney seeking a dynamic injunction against multiple websites that were illegally streaming its content. The Bombay High Court granted the injunction, recognizing that it was essential to keep pace with the constantly changing tactics employed by infringing websites. This case further solidified the legal basis for dynamic injunctions in India.

D. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. & Ors. v. Wunderbar Films Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

In the case of Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. & Ors. v. Wunderbar Films Pvt. Ltd & Ors, the Madras High Court issued a dynamic injunction against a varied range of websites and ISPs involved in the piracy of the movie “Kaala. The court emphasized the need for an evolving and flexible approach to tackling digital piracy, emphasizing the dynamic nature of the problem.

A recent case of Universal City Studios LLC & Ors. vs. Fzmovies.net & Ors. [CS(COMM) 202/2023] whereinSix leading entertainment companies viz. Universal City Studios, Warner Bros, Columbia Pictures Industries Inc, Netflix Studios, Paramount Pictures Corporation and Disney Enterprises, filed a lawsuit at the Delhi High Court against 40 rogue websites engaged in online piracy. Here are the key points of the case:

  • These websites made copyrighted content available for streaming and download without authorization, infringing on the exclusive rights of the plaintiffs.
  • The plaintiffs claimed exclusive rights to communicate their content to the public, and the defendants’ websites allowed users to access and download their copyrighted cinematograph films, TV shows, and other audio-visual content without permission.
  • The defendants also provided links to online locations where users could engage in these infringing activities.


The plaintiffs presented evidence of the defendants infringing activities, including “pirate branding” to suggest that their websites were new versions of previously blocked sites. Despite receiving legal notices to cease their activities, the defendants continued to infringe on the plaintiffs’ copyrights. Many of the defendant’s websites had also been disabled in other jurisdictions. The plaintiffs argued that the defendants were liable under Sections 51(a)(ii), 51(b), and 51(a)(i) of the Copyright Act for making copies of original content, storing it electronically, communicating it to the public, and facilitating unauthorized streaming and downloading.


Hon’ble Justice Amit Bansal relied on the case of UTV Software Communication Ltd. judgment and found that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case. The Court determined that the balance of convenience favoured the plaintiffs. As a result, the Court issued an interim order that restrained the 40 defendants from hosting, streaming, reproducing, distributing, making available to the public, or communicating any work for which the plaintiff’s held copyrights. Additionally, the order directed internet and telecom providers to block the defendants’ websites, URLs, and IP addresses.

This judgment represents a significant step in combating online piracy by granting an interim injunction against rogue websites and ordering the blocking of these websites by internet and telecom service providers. It demonstrates the judiciary’s commitment to protecting the intellectual property rights of content creators and copyright holders in India.

Further, in the case of Star India Private Limited v Jio Live.TV, 2023 SCC OnLine Del6095, the Delhi High Court has restrained Jio Live TV and other rogue websites from unauthorisedly broadcasting and streaming the ICC Men’s Cricket World Cup 2023. This is case where a lawsuit was filed by Star India Pvt Ltd and Novi Digital Entertainment Pvt Ltd which operates Disney+ Hotstar platform. The plaintiffs herein have stated before the Court that they have the exclusive global media rights, including the television and digital rights for various ICC events such as the World Cup, which was scheduled to be held from October 5 to November 19, 2023. As the said event being one of the most popular sporting events in the world, a large number of websites were likely to indulge in unauthorised dissemination of the World Cup content and match. The Plaintiff in view of the exclusive rights acquired from ICC enjoy broadcast reproduction rights under the provisions of Section 37 of the Copyright Act, 1957.

Hon’ble Justice Mrs. Prathiba M Singh has specifically observed in this case that indisputably the World Cup cricket matches were extremely popular that too in the Indian subcontinent. The Court found and noted that some of the rogue websites which in the past indulged in piracy were very likely to continue the same authorised streaming and thus, decided to restrain the said rogue websites from disseminating and communicating to the public any part of the cricket match events without authorisation or license from the plaintiffs. Thus, defendants who operates various rogue websites which are stated to be primarily hosting illegal and pirated content are restrained by an ad-interim order from communicating, screening, making available or disseminating any part of the ICC World Cup Cricket matches on any electronic or digital platform in any manner whatsoever. The Court further directed the concerned authorities to block and suspend the rogue websites and also illuminated that if any further offending websites are discovered, the plaintiff can communicate their details to both Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Electronics and internet service provider for issuance of blocking orders.

V. Benefits and Challenges of Dynamic Injunctions

Dynamic injunctions offer several benefits in the fight against digital piracy:

Adaptability: They can adapt to changing circumstances and tactics used by infringing websites, ensuring that copyright holders can effectively block access to pirated content.

Efficiency: Dynamic injunctions enable prompt action against infringing websites, preventing further financial losses to copyright owners.

Comprehensive Relief: They provide comprehensive relief by targeting not only infringing websites but also ISPs that facilitate access to such websites.

However, dynamic injunctions also present certain challenges:

Technical Expertise: The implementation of dynamic injunctions requires technical expertise to identify and block infringing websites effectively.

Over blocking: There is a risk of over blocking, where legitimate websites may inadvertently be blocked due to similarities in domain names or IP addresses.

Jurisdictional Issues: Some infringing websites operate from jurisdictions that may not cooperate with Indian courts, making enforcement challenging.

VI. Conclusion

Digital piracy continues to be a significant threat to copyright holders in India. Dynamic injunctions have emerged as a vital legal tool to combat this menace effectively. Landmark cases which have been discussed above have played a crucial role in shaping the legal landscape surrounding dynamic injunctions.

While dynamic injunctions offer several advantages, it is essential to strike a balance between protecting copyright holders and ensuring due process and freedom of access to information. Additionally, continued efforts are needed to address technical challenges and jurisdictional issues to make dynamic injunctions even more effective in the fight against digital piracy in India. In this digital age, dynamic injunctions are a vital weapon in the legal arsenal to protect intellectual property and foster creativity in the country.




https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/media/entertainment/media/delhi-hc-restrains-unauthorised-streaming-of-icc-cricket-world cup/articleshow/104048421.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst




https://www.managingip.com/article/2a5bqz03xe0d4py1oqj9d/india-court-issues-first-dynamic-injunction https://www.mondaq.com/india/copyright/1017874/dynamic-injunctions-to-tackle-digital-piracy-in-india

No Comments

Leave a Comment