- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
JioHotstar Gets Protection: Delhi High Court Grants Dynamic Injunction For India Tour Of England 2025
JioHotstar Gets Protection: Delhi High Court Grants Dynamic Injunction For India Tour Of England 2025
Introduction
The Delhi High Court has recognized the intellectual property rights of JioStar India with respect to the digital streaming of the India Tour of England 2025 on its OTT platform, JioHotstar. The High Court has granted a dynamic+ injunction to the media company and restrained rogue websites from streaming or making available for viewing and downloading any content related to the Tour.
Factual Background
JioStar India Pvt. Ltd., a leading entertainment and media company, acquired exclusive digital media rights for the India Tour of England 2025 from Culver Max Entertainment Pvt Ltd (Sony/Licensor). The company claimed that rogue websites were unlawfully streaming sporting events, including the India Tour of England 2025, without authorization.
Procedural Background
The plaintiff, JioStar India Pvt. Ltd., filed a suit against the rogue websites, seeking an order of temporary injunction restraining them from communicating, hosting, streaming, or making available for viewing and downloading the plaintiff's content related to the India Tour of England 2025. The Delhi High Court considered the application and granted a dynamic+ injunction in favor of the plaintiff.
Issues Involved
1. Intellectual Property Rights: Whether JioStar India has exclusive intellectual property rights for the digital streaming of the India Tour of England 2025.
2. Copyright Infringement: Whether the rogue websites have infringed JioStar India's copyright by streaming or making available for viewing and downloading content related to the Tour.
Contentions of the Parties
Plaintiff's Contentions: JioStar India contended that the rogue websites were unlawfully streaming sporting events, including the India Tour of England 2025, without authorization. The company claimed that it had acquired exclusive digital media rights for the Tour and that the defendants' actions constituted copyright infringement.
Defendants' Contentions: The rogue websites did not appear or contest the suit.
Reasoning & Analysis
The Delhi High Court noted that the systematic, organized, and intentional nature of the infringement, and the regularity and consistency with which the content was being uploaded on the rogue websites, showed the extent of the violation of JioStar India's rights. The Court held that JioStar India had made out a prima facie case in its favor and granted a dynamic+ injunction to protect its copyrighted works.
Final Outcome
The coram of Justice Saurabh Banerjee granted a dynamic+ injunction in favor of JioStar India, restraining any person/entity, including the defendants, from communicating, streaming, or making available for viewing and downloading any part of the India Tour of England 2025 matches on any electronic or digital platform. The Court also directed the blocking of certain websites.
Implications
This judgment highlights the importance of protecting intellectual property rights in the digital age. The dynamic+ injunction granted by the Court is a significant step in preventing copyright infringement and protecting the rights of content owners. The judgment also emphasizes the need for courts to be proactive in addressing the challenges posed by rogue websites and modern technology.
In this case the plaintiff was represented by Mr. Sidharth Chopra, Mr. Yatinder Garg and Mr. Priyansh Kohli, Advocates.



