Manmohan, J. - (1.) "Whoops! The web is not the web we wanted in every respect" Tim Berners-Lee, Inventor of Web. It is rare that in an ex-parte matter questions of law of general public importance arise for consideration. However, in the present batch of ex-parte matters the following seminal issues arise for consideration:- (A) Whether an infringer of copyright on the internet is to be treated differently from an infringer in the physical world? (B) Whether seeking blocking of a website dedicated to piracy makes one an opponent of a free and open internet? (C) What is a 'Rogue Website'? (D) Whether the test for determining a 'Rogue Website' is a qualitative or a quantitative one? (E)Whether the defendant-websites fall in the category of 'Rogue Websites'? (F) Whether this Court would be justified to pass directions to block the 'Rogue Websites' in their entirety? (G) How should the Court deal with the 'hydra headed' 'Rogue Websites' who on being blocked, actually multiply and resurface as redirect or mirror or alphanumeric websites? BRIEF FACTS
(2.) The present eight suits have been filed by the plaintiffs primarily seeking injunction restraining infringement of copyright on account of defendants communicating to the public the plaintiffs' original content/cinematographic works without authorization. The reliefs sought by the plaintiffs can broadly be classified as under:- a) Permanent injunction restraining the defendants from hosting, communicating, making available, etc. the original content of the plaintiffs on their website. b) Order directing Internet Service Providers (hereinafter referred to as "ISPs") to block access to the websites of the defendants. c) Order directing Registrars of the defendant-websites to disclose the contact details and other relevant details of the registrants.
(3.) The plaintiffs are companies, who are engaged in the business of creating content, producing and distributing cinematographic films around the world including in India.;