Delhi HC passes ‘dynamic injunction’ against illegal ICC World Cup broadcast: What this means, what was the case

What is a dynamic injunction?

An injunction is an official order given by a law court, usually to stop someone from doing something. However, in most cases, such injunctions are granted by the court only after the court identifies the work and determines the plaintiff’s copyright in that work. To avoid this cumbersome process and grant protection to copyrighted works in a timely manner, courts sometimes rely on the concept of “dynamic” injunctions.

A dynamic injunction is passed to protect copyrighted works even before they are publicly released, distributed, or created. It ensures that no irreparable loss is caused to its authors and owner, owing to the imminent possibility of such works being uploaded on rogue websites or their newer versions immediately after their creation or release, given the challenges posed by online piracy.

This is not the first time that the Delhi High Court has passed a “dynamic injunction”.

In August, the court observed that given the nature of the “illegalities that rogue websites indulge in”, there is a need to pass injunctions which are also “dynamic’ as once a film or series is released, it might be immediately uploaded on the rogue websites, causing severe and instant monetary loss to its creators.

What are the other cases where such injunctions have been passed?

In the present case, Star India Pvt. Ltd. said that since 2021, the Delhi HC had granted similar “dynamic” injunctions against several such rogue websites in Star India’s favour, which led to them ultimately being taken down.

Besides this, Star India also relied on the HC’s August 9 ruling in the case of “Universal City Studios LLC v. Dotmovies.baby 2023:DHC:584” where the court passed a dynamic injunction protecting works generated during the case’s pendency and even those which might be created in the future, from infringement, till the time courts come to the rescue of the right holder.

Prior to this, the Delhi HC in its 2019 ruling in UTV vs. 1337x.to introduced the concept of “dynamic” injunctions for the first time.

Similarly, the present plea filed by Star India stated that given the exclusive rights they had acquired from ICC, they enjoyed broadcast reproduction rights which are contemplated under Section 37 of the 1957 Copyright Act.

Adding that in the past, it had come across almost all major sporting events being illegally communicated and disseminated on the internet, Star approached the court seeking an injunction restraining the defendant websites.

What is Section 37 of the Copyright Act?

Section 37 deals with a “special right” extended to every broadcasting organisation.

Section 37 (2) proceeds to enlist what constitutes an infringement of this right. It states that “during the continuance of a broadcast reproduction right” any person who, without the licence of the right’s owner engages in re-broadcasting the broadcast; or causes the broadcast to be heard or seen by the public on payment of charges; or makes any sound or visual recording of the broadcast; or makes any reproduction of such sound or visual recording where the initial recording was done without licence or was licensed, for any purpose not envisaged by the licence; or sells or hires to the public, or offers for such sale or hire, any such sound recording or visual recording, will be deemed to have infringed this right, subject to the provisions of Section 39.

Section 39 provides exceptions when the reproduction of such content can be considered as ‘fair dealing; and not copyright infringement.