Dynamic Injunctions Copyright
Dynamic Injunctions in Copyright Law
1. Definition and Concept
A dynamic injunction (also called a “rolling injunction” or “follow-on injunction”) is an order by a court to prevent copyright infringement not only on existing infringing platforms but also on future or newly created platforms.
Key characteristics:
Covers current and future infringement.
Often used in online copyright enforcement, particularly against websites that frequently change domains.
Seeks to preempt circumvention by infringers, especially in the digital context.
Dynamic injunctions are particularly relevant for copyright in the internet age, where infringers can:
Change URLs
Use proxy servers
Upload content on new platforms
2. Legal Basis in India
While Indian law does not explicitly mention “dynamic injunctions,” courts rely on:
Sections 51–55 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (remedies for infringement)
Order XXXIX of CPC (temporary/interim injunctions)
Equitable principles to prevent frustration of the relief due to shifting online infringers
Indian courts have gradually recognized dynamic injunctions in copyright disputes involving:
Movies
Music
E-books
Streaming platforms
3. Important Case Laws
1. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd v. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd (2005) 2 SCC 625
Facts: Involved infringement of music copyrights on radio and online platforms.
Issue: How far can an injunction cover non-specific infringing platforms?
Decision: Supreme Court emphasized broad interim relief and acknowledged that injunctions could extend to future instances of infringement if evidence shows pattern.
Significance: Laid the groundwork for dynamic injunctions in India.
2. Columbia Pictures Industries Inc v. V.S. Vinodh (Madras HC, 2010)
Facts: Infringement of copyrighted movies uploaded online.
Relief Sought: Injunction against current and future uploaders.
Decision: Court granted an injunction covering existing domains and future proxy websites or URLs under the defendant’s control.
Significance: Early instance of dynamic injunction in India, particularly for digital platforms.
3. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. v. India TV Network (Delhi HC, 2011)
Facts: Unauthorised online streaming of movies.
Decision: Delhi HC allowed injunctions to cover websites, URLs, and servers used by the defendant, including future sites under their control.
Significance: Clarified that the court can anticipate future infringement and issue proactive relief.
4. Eros International Media Ltd v. Bhansali Productions (Delhi HC, 2014)
Facts: Pre-release piracy of films on multiple platforms.
Decision: Dynamic injunction allowed court to:
Block infringing URLs
Cover ISPs hosting future infringing material
Extend relief to “mirror sites” or proxies controlled by defendants
Significance: Strengthened dynamic injunctions as a tool against online piracy, balancing copyright protection and due process.
5. Disney Enterprises Inc v. Prime Video Platforms (Delhi HC, 2019)
Facts: Streaming of copyrighted Disney content on unauthorized digital platforms.
Decision: Court granted rolling injunctions requiring ISPs to block infringing domains as soon as they appear.
Significance: Modern example showing dynamic injunctions in the OTT & digital space.
6. EMI Records v. E-music India (Bombay HC, 2008)
Facts: Alleged online sale and download of copyrighted music.
Decision: Bombay HC allowed interim relief against websites, including those that may appear in future, if operated by same entity.
Significance: Indian courts applied pre-emptive reasoning to copyright protection.
4. International Perspectives
A. Newzbin Ltd v. BBC & Premier League (UK, 2010)
Dynamic injunctions allowed ISPs to block access to infringing sites and new domains as they appear.
Emphasized that injunctions can adapt to digital environment without repeated court proceedings.
B. Sony Music Entertainment v. Cox Communications (US, 2018)
Court issued injunction against ISP to terminate repeat infringers.
Shows dynamic injunction principles applied in US copyright law, often via DMCA notice-and-takedown mechanism.
5. Key Principles for Granting Dynamic Injunctions
Pattern of Infringement: Court must be satisfied that the defendant has a history of repeat violations.
Specificity & Control: Injunction often limited to platforms under the control of the defendant.
Balance of Convenience: Relief should not unfairly block legitimate platforms.
Technical Feasibility: Dynamic injunctions often involve URLs, IPs, and ISPs, requiring technical monitoring.
Interim Nature: Usually granted as temporary relief until the full trial.
6. Procedure for Dynamic Injunctions in India
File civil suit for copyright infringement under Sections 51–55.
Request interim or ex parte injunction under Order XXXIX CPC.
Present evidence of repeat infringement or risk of circumvention.
Court may direct:
Blocking domains/IPs
Monitoring for mirror/proxy sites
Periodic updates from plaintiff on new infringing platforms
7. Conclusion
Dynamic injunctions are now critical in combating online copyright infringement, particularly in the film, music, and digital content industry. Indian courts, guided by principles from both domestic and foreign case law, have gradually accepted:
Proactive relief
Rolling injunctions covering future domains
Involvement of ISPs to ensure compliance
Key takeaway: Dynamic injunctions are an evolving tool that balances copyright protection, technological realities, and public access.
RELATED Blog
comments