Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
R.I. Chagla, J.
Bhanushali Studios Limited & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Telegram Messenger Llp & Anr. – Respondents
Interim Application (L) No. 18597 of 2022 and Commercial IPR Suit (L) No. 18595 of 2022
Decided On : 16-06-2022
Copyright Infringement - Film Piracy - John Doe Action - Copyright Act, 1957 - Section 51 - Section 55 - Section 63 - Section 55A
Fact of the Case:
The Plaintiffs, producers of a film, sought urgent relief for removal of infringing links and police assistance to restrain copyright infringement. They claimed revenue loss due to piracy and filed a John Doe Suit against unknown entities hosting infringing links.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the infringing links directly infringed the Plaintiffs' copyright, causing revenue loss and affecting future deals. It relied on previous judgments in similar cases to grant ad-interim relief against the Defendants.
Issues: Copyright infringement, ad-interim relief, John Doe action, revenue loss, future deals
Ratio Decidendi: The Court granted ad-interim relief, citing provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957, and previous judgments to protect the Plaintiffs' copyright and restrain piracy.
Final Decision: The Court granted ad-interim relief against the Defendants, allowing the Plaintiffs to remove Defendant No. 1 from the suit and apply for further relief if necessary.
ORDER
1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants/Plaintiffs and the learned Counsel for Defendant No. 1.
2. Urgent ad-interim relief is being sought for removal and/ or deletion of infringing links enumerated at Exh.C with immediate effect and for provision of police assistance to the Applicants in such removal and deletion of the infringing links which the Applicants' claim infringe the Applicants' copyright in the subject film titled Janhit Mein Jaari.
3. It is stated by the Applicants/Plaintiffs that the Applicant/Plaintiff Nos. 1 to 3 are producers of the cinematography film titled Janhit Mein Jaari. It is the Plaintiffs' case that the subject film had been released worldwide and in India on 10th June 2022. In India it has released on approx. 600 screens. Censor certificate has been issued in the name of the Applicant/Plaintiff No. 1. The Plaintiff has filed the present Suit against Defendant No. 1 firm having App of Telegram on which there were links available on chat groups through which the subject film was available for download. The Plaintiffs' legal team on 11th June 2022, contacted certain persons who appraised the Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs made a complaint before the BKC Police Station on 11th June 2022 and after which it was noticed that the link circulated on Defendant No. 1's App had become inactive.
4. The Suit has also been filed as John Doe Suit against the Defendant No. 2. This is in view of the Plaintiffs learning on 12th June 2022 of several infringing links being found on the internet. These infringing links have been enumerated in Exh.C to the Plaint. These infringing links appear to be currently active and make available a pirated copy of the subject film available for download.
5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicants/Plaintiffs has tendered screenshots from the website moovana net, which is one of the infringing websites in which it appears that the subject film is available for viewing through online stream. When the user has access and watches the subject film for 40 minutes, there is a box which appears wherein it is mentioned that 'to continue enjoying your favorite movie, please sign in' and there are two boxes namely, 'Login' and 'Free sign up'. This is displayed in one of the screenshots. The screenshots are taken on record and marked X for identification.
6. It is the case of the Applicants/Plaintiffs that they are suffering revenue loss in the theaters due to such piracy of the subject film being displayed on the infringing links listed in Exh.C to the Plaint. Further claim is made by the Applicants/Plaintiffs that there is a revenue loss for the reasons that OTT platform and/or any further distributions would not want to execute deals with the Plaintiffs since they would not find subscribers for the film, since the film is freely available online.
7. In my prima facie view, a case has been made out by the Applicants/Plaintiffs that the Defendant No. 2 which is an unknown entity and who have been proceeded against in John Doe action is by virtue of the infringing links on the internet enumerated at Exh.C to the Plaint directly infringing the copyright held by the producers/Plaintiffs in the film as these unknown Defendants appear to have no licence and/or authority to make available a copy of the film to the public.
8. This Court has in John Doe actions in copyright infringements passed orders from time to time and two such orders, one passed in Shemaroo Entertainment Ltd. Vs. Gujarath Telelink Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.[1], on 1st July 2016 by the Single Judge of this Court and the other passed in Red Chillies Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s. Hathway Sonali Om Crystal Cable Pvt. Ltd. Anr.[2] on 17th December 2015 have been relied upon by the learned Counsel for the Applicants/Plaintiffs. These orders are also passed with respect of the films which were the subject matter in those cases.
[1] Notice of Motion 854/15 in Suit (L) 271/15 order dated 1.07.2016
[2] Notice of Motion (L) 3549/15 in S
The main legal point established is the Court's power to grant ad-interim relief in copyright infringement cases, relying on the Copyright Act, 1957, and previous case law.
The Court emphasized that the Plaintiff's gross delay in seeking relief precluded equity, and found no substantial similarity or evidence proving copyright infringement or passing off.
The judgment establishes the legal principle that unauthorized distribution of copyrighted films is prohibited under the Cinematograph Act, 1952, and perpetrators can be held liable for damages and c....
Delay in approaching the court, awareness of the film release, and financial repercussions were crucial in the court's decision to reject the injunction.
The court established that unauthorized distribution of cinematograph films constitutes copyright infringement, allowing for dynamic injunctions to protect against evolving infringement tactics.
The court may grant interim relief to prevent copyright infringement, considering both potential injury to the claimant and the interests of the respondents.
Courts can grant permanent injunctions against unauthorized streaming of copyrighted material, affirming producers' exclusive rights, especially when unauthorized use could cause financial harm.
The court may grant a 'Dynamic+' injunction to protect copyright holders against rogue websites by extending blocking orders beyond currently identified infringing content to future content and newly....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
