R.K. Productions Pvt Ltd v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
In the High Court of Madras
O.A. 358/2012 in C.S. 294/2012
Before Justice K. Chandru
Decided on October 30, 2012

Relevancy of the case: Application seeking a permanent injunction for stopping free download of pirated movies

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 79, 81)
• The Copyright Act, 1957 (Section 2(m), 14(d), 51(a)(ii), 55)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• Both the applicants were production houses that wanted an injunction on the websites, etc., that violated their copyrights.
• The applicants’ movies have been pirated and put on websites that let users download and view movies free of cost.
• Therefore, the applicants wanted to seek a direction for the defendants to block unauthorised web pages and websites.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel argued that the Internet Service Provider (ISP) provides a link to the person uploading illegal pirated content through web links.
• The petitioner’s counsel argued that Section 81 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 overrides Section 79.
• The respondent’s counsel argues that as the defendants of the previous case are ISPs, they would be absolved of liabilities under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
• The respondent’s counsel submits that the respondents don’t have the power to block web links on their own and the petitioners have not stated any specific violations against them.
• The third respondent Bharti Airtel Limited submitted that being an ISP it cannot control, track or exercise due diligence on the content of websites.

Opinion of the Bench

• The court opined that there was no application of Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. This type of internet wrong that includes Copyright infringement has been excluded by the proviso to Section 81 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
• The bench held that the Information Technology Act, 2000 does provide ISPs with the power to block content from the internet.
• The court held that the ISPs were proper parties to the suit and that they were profiting from this process.
• The court opined that the applicants had the discretion to give the particulars about the URL which had the infringed movie and the case cannot be barred for non-disclosure of particulars.

Final Decision

• Injunction applications disposed of.
• Applications for vacating interim injunction stood dismissed.

This case summary has been prepared by Tuba Aftab, an undergraduate student at IIMT & School of Law, GGSIPU, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2021.