Universal City Studios LLC and Ors v. DotMovies Baby and Ors

Brief Facts of the Case:

In the case of Universal City Studios LLC and Ors v. DotMovies Baby and Ors, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court delivered the first-ever "Dynamic+" Injunction order on August 9, 2023, against copyright infringement by flagrantly infringing online locations (FIOLs) for protecting the future works of the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs are renowned Hollywood studios engaged in the production and distribution of a large amount of original creative content, including motion pictures, television series, and more.

The plaintiffs filed the current lawsuit against a number of websites that allow users to watch, stream, access, and download such content without receiving a licence or permission from the plaintiffs.

Contentions of the Plaintiff:

The plaintiffs asserted that a number of devices can be used to access and view the content generated, produced, and distributed by or on behalf of the plaintiffs' studios, and that these devices also allow for the authorized streaming and downloading of such content.

The Plaintiffs' studios have the copyright to all of the works that can be protected as cinematograph films as well as to a number of underlying works that are acknowledged as such by the Copyright Act of 1957. The plaintiffs further asserted that they had spent a significant amount of resources on the development, production, and distribution of the content, as well as on communicating the finished product to the public.

Additionally, it was asserted that significant resources and effort were put into selling and advertising the plaintiffs' content.

Judgment:

Owing to the above facts and circumstances, an ex parte preliminary injunction was issued to restrain the defendants, all of whom are rogue websites, from disseminating, copying, distributing, making available to the public and/or communicated in any form whatsoever whether it be any content protected by Plaintiff's copyright, including Plaintiff's future works, for which copyright ownership  is undisputed, through their websites identified in lawsuit or any mirror/redirect sites or alphanumeric variations thereof, including sites linked to the defendant's site based on  name, trademark, identification or even is the source of the content.

The Court found that by promoting pirated content and discouraging viewers from subscribing to legitimate, licensed platforms, Dotmovies.baby and other shady websites were harming the plaintiffs and causing "irreparable loss” to them.

To keep up with the dynamic nature of the infringements committed by Hydra-headed website, this Court considered that the issuance of this "Dynamic Injunction +" protects copyrighted works from the time they are created as to ensure that no irreparable loss is caused to the authors and owners of copyrighted works, as there is an imminent possibility of the work being uploaded on rogue websites or their newer versions right after movies/shows/series etc.

Conclusion:

Every injunction issued by a court of law should be of an effective kind. Additionally, the injunction need to cover content that the Plaintiffs may create on a daily basis as well as content that was already published before the lawsuit was filed. In a typical copyright infringement case, the court first identifies the work, establishes the plaintiff's ownership in the subject work, and then issues an injunction.

Given the illegal nature in which rogue websites engage, it is necessary to pass injunctions which are also dynamic in nature, since upon the release of a film or series, they may be uploaded instantly on rogue websites, causing serious and immediate monetary loss. Copyright in future works arises immediately after the work is created, and it may not be possible for a plaintiff to go to court for every future film or series produced to obtain an anti-piracy injunction.

Dynamic injunctions were previously used only to stop FIOLs and mirror websites from violating existing copyrighted content. The most recent judgment, however, broadens the use of dynamic injunctions to immediately prevent any upcoming works or compositions by the plaintiffs from being hosted illegally, without the need for the plaintiff to submit a new application to the court.