The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained 123MoviesHub.TC (defendant rogue websites), and persons acting for or through them, from hosting, streaming, reproducing, distributing, making available or communicating to the public, or facilitating those acts, any cinematograph work or content in which the Universal City Studios LLC, Warner Bros., Columbia, Netflix, Paramount, Disney (plaintiffs) hold copyright.
The Court also directed the Internet Service Providers (ISPs/ other defendants) to block access to those websites. The plaintiffs were given liberty to seek impleadment of mirror, redirect or alphanumeric websites that merely provide new means of accessing the injuncted websites, through an appropriate application. The Court clarified that the decree benefits each plaintiff only in respect of works in which that plaintiff holds copyright.
Briefly, six film and entertainment companies, namely, Universal City Studios, Warner Bros., Columbia Pictures, Netflix Studios, Paramount Pictures and Disney Enterprises, filed a copyright infringement suit against websites allegedly streaming and offering their films and other audiovisual content without permission. Internet service providers (ISPs), the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) were joined to facilitate blocking of the websites.
The Court had granted interim blocking directions, which were subsequently extended to additional websites. Despite service, the defendant websites neither appeared nor filed written statements. The plaintiffs did not press damages or costs. Although they had been given time to apply for summary judgment, they filed no application and instead sought a final decision on the existing pleadings and documents.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav examined whether it could grant summary judgment without a specific application and whether oral evidence was necessary. It explained that Rule 27 of the Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022 expressly permits summary judgment without such an application, while retaining the substantive safeguards under Order XIIIA CPC.
The Court found that the investigator’s affidavit and documentary material supported the plaintiffs’ uncontested allegations. Requiring further evidence would merely repeat the plaint and serve no useful purpose. Applying the UTV Software test, it held that defendants were rogue websites whose primary purpose was to commit and facilitate copyright infringement. Their anonymity, unauthorised streaming and failure to respond to legal notices supported that conclusion.
