Could Lead To Significant Financial Losses: Delhi High Court Restrains Websites From Illegally Streaming Films & Shows Like ‘Friends’, ‘Stranger Things’ & ‘Squid Game’
The Delhi High Court said that swift action to prevent the alleged infringements is crucial in this case.
The Delhi High Court has restrained some websites from illegally streaming films and shows such as ‘Friends’, ‘Stranger Things’, ‘Squid Game’, ‘Batman’, ‘Encanto’, etc.
The Court granted dynamic injunction in favour of Warner Bros., Netflix, Disney, Apple, and Crunchyroll.
A Single Bench of Justice Tejas Karia remarked, “The Plaintiffs have made out a prima facie case for grant of an ex-parte ad-interim injunction. Balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Infringing Websites. Irreparable injury would be caused to the Plaintiffs if an ex-parte ad- interim injunction is not granted. The need for immediate relief is particularly pressing in this case as the Infringing Websites are making available the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works, which could lead to significant financial losses for the Plaintiffs.”
The Bench added that swift action to prevent the alleged infringements is crucial in this case.
Advocate Siddharth Chopra represented the Plaintiffs, while Advocate Yash Raj represented the Defendants.
Facts of the Case
A Suit was filed by the Plaintiffs seeking relief of permanent injunction, restraining the Defendants from infringing the exclusive rights in the Plaintiffs’ original content/work by making their original content/work available for downloading, streaming, uploading, and reproducing, along with other ancillary reliefs. The Plaintiffs were members of Motion Picture Association, Inc. and/or the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment. They were amongst the leading global entertainment companies engaged in the business of creation, production and distribution of motion pictures/cinematographic films. The Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works were covered under ‘work’ as defined under Section 2(y) of the Copyright Act, 1957. They had all the rights under Section 14(d) of the Act in such cinematograph films/shows. They were the author and/or first owner and/or owners and/or exclusive distributors of the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works in India. The Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works that were subject matter of the Suit are as follows –
• Warner Bros.: Friends, Suicide Squad, Mob Psycho 100 – Season 1, The Conjuring 2, Wonder Woman, A Star is Born, Aquaman, Batman, and Joker: Folie à Deux.
• Netflix: Stranger Things, Ibiza, Triple Frontier, Ghost Stories, Squid Game, Romantic Killer, and Lookism.
• Disney: Finding Dory, The Jungle Book, Mulan, Encanto, Mufasa, and Moana 2.
• Apple: Palm Royale, Silo, Harriet The Spy, Emancipation, and Black Bird.
• Crunchyroll: The Angel Next Door Spoils Me Rotten
The Suit was filed against the Defendants/websites which indulged in online piracy by making available for download and otherwise providing access to infringing and illegal content.
Court’s Observations & Directions
The High Court in the above regard, observed, “Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff’s, the pleadings and the documents on record it is clear that the Plaintiffs are the owners of the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works. Having perused the screenshots of the Infringing Websites, it is revealed that the Infringing Websites are, on real-time basis, offering for viewing and downloading the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works, without their consent or a valid license, resulting in financial losses to the Plaintiffs.”
The Court, therefore, issued the following directions –
• Defendants, its owners, partners, proprietors, officers, servants, employees, and all others in capacity of principal or agent acting for and on their behalf, or anyone claiming through, by or under it, are restrained from, in any manner hosting, streaming, reproducing, distributing, making available to the public and/or communicating to the public, or facilitating the same, on their websites, through the internet in any manner whatsoever, the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works, i.e., cinematographic work /content / programme / show in relation to which Plaintiffs have copyright or exclusive distribution rights / and or any other right.
• The ONRs (Online Name Registrars) shall lock and suspend Defendant websites within 72 hours of being communicated with a copy of the Order and shall file all the Basic Subscriber Information, including the name, address, contact information, email addresses, bank details, IP logs, and any other relevant information available of the owners / operators of Defendants in a sealed cover / password protected document within four weeks of being communicated with a copy of the Order
• The ISPs (Internet Service Providers) shall block access to the Defendant websites identified by the Plaintiffs within 72 hours.
“To keep up with the hydra-headed nature of the infringement actions of such infringing domains / websites, this Court finds it fit to grant a ‘Dynamic+ injunction’ to protect the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works as soon as they are created, to ensure that no irreparable loss is caused to the owners of Copyrighted Works, as there is an imminent possibility of the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works being uploaded on Infringing Websites or their newer versions immediately thereafter”, it further said.
Conclusion
The Court also permitted the Plaintiffs to implead any mirror / redirect / alphanumeric variations of the websites identified in the Suit as Defendants, including those websites which are associated with them, either based on the name, branding, identity or even source of content, by filing an application for impleadment under Order I Rule 10 of the CPC and extend the Order against them, in the event such websites merely provide new means of accessing the same primary Infringing Websites that have been injuncted.
“If any website, which is not primarily an infringing website, is blocked pursuant to the present Order, they shall be permitted to approach the Court by filing an Affidavit that it does not intend to engage in any unauthorized or illegal dissemination of the Plaintiffs’ Copyrighted Works. In such a situation, the Court would consider modifying the injunction as the facts and circumstances so warrant”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the High Court issued necessary directions and listed the case on April 20, 2026.
Cause Title- Warner Bros. Entertainment INC & Ors. v. Animesugez.To & Ors. (Case Number: CS(COMM)1361/2025)
Appearance:
Plaintiffs: Advocates Siddharth Chopra, Raghav Goyal, Mehr. Sidhu, A. Moin, and Aditya Singh Thakur.
Defendants: Advocates Yash Raj and Geetanjali Vishwanathan.
