Sanchayita Lahkar

The High Court of Delhi Single Bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that the plaintiffs had made out a prima facie case for the grant of a ‘dynamic+’ injunction against several rogue websites engaged in unauthorised streaming of the FIFA Club World Cup 2025. The court directed the concerned domain name registrars, internet service providers, and government departments to block, suspend, or lock access to the infringing websites in real time. It further permitted the plaintiffs to communicate details of any mirror, redirect, or alphanumeric variations of the infringing domains to ensure immediate blocking during and after the event. The court issued summons returnable on 08.10.2025.

The plaintiffs, DAZN Limited and DAZN Software Private Limited, approached the High Court of Delhi by way of CS(COMM) 536/2025 seeking relief against rogue websites infringing their exclusive broadcasting rights. Plaintiff No. 1, DAZN Limited, is a company incorporated in England and Wales in 2007 and Plaintiff No. 2, DAZN Software Private Limited, oversees operations in India since its incorporation under the Companies Act, 2013 in 2022. The plaintiffs operate a global sports streaming platform, DAZN Streams, accessible via https://dazngroup.com/ and its dedicated mobile application, providing a library of sporting content including football, martial arts, tennis, and snooker.

Also Read: Supreme Court Restores Rejection Of Possession Claim Over 53 Acres In Raidurg | Title Based On Unregistered 1982 Agreement Is Legally Void And Possession Not Proved

On 19.05.2025, the plaintiffs acquired exclusive worldwide media rights, including television, digital, and sub-licensing rights, for broadcasting the FIFA Club World Cup 2025 scheduled from 14.06.2025 to 13.07.2025 in the United States of America. Their rights under Section 37 of the Copyright Act, 1957, entitle them to broadcast, re-broadcast, retransmit, stream, and communicate the event to the public.

On 17.05.2025, the plaintiffs discovered via investigators that Defendants Nos. 1 to 6 were illegally streaming DAZN streams of Ligue 1 and Serie A events on their websites without authorisation. On 18.05.2025, notices were issued to incumbent domain name registrars (DNRs) regarding these infringing activities. The plaintiffs alleged that these websites were circumventing DAZN’s exclusive streaming mechanisms and engaging in piracy for financial enrichment.

Defendant Nos. 1 to 6 were identified as buffsports.me, sporthd.me, piratemedia.me, vipbox.lc, strimsy.top, and vipstand.pm. Their respective DNRs are 1API GmbH, NETIM, NameCheap Inc., Tucows Domains Inc., and Sarek Oy.

Plaintiffs arrayed domain name registrars as Defendant Nos. 7 to 11, internet service providers as Defendant Nos. 12 to 20, Department of Telecommunications as Defendant No. 21, and Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology as Defendant No. 22. Defendant No. 23 was impleaded as ‘John Doe’ to cover unknown future infringing websites.

Plaintiffs filed applications seeking exemption from pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, leave to file additional documents under Order XI Rule 1(4) CPC, and exemption from advance service upon certain defendants under Section 151 CPC. These applications were allowed by the court.

Summons of the suit were directed to be issued to the defendants through all permissible modes returnable before the learned Joint Registrar on 28.08.2025. The court directed the defendants to file written statements within thirty days of receipt, accompanied by affidavits of admission or denial of documents. Replications, if any, were directed to be filed within fifteen days of receiving written statements, also with affidavits of admission or denial.

It was recorded that denial of documents without justification would attract costs. The court also granted liberty for inspection of documents within requisite timelines and listed the matter for marking exhibits on 28.08.2025.

The plaintiffs sought a temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC to restrain Defendant Nos. 1 to 6 and other infringing websites from communicating, hosting, streaming, or making available their broadcasts of the FIFA Club World Cup 2025 without authorisation. Relief was also sought against DNRs for locking or suspending the domains, disclosure of registrant details, and against internet service providers and government departments to block access to the infringing websites.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee observed that the case, at first glance, appeared to involve clear copyright infringement by defendants numbered 1 to 23, who were using modern technology to hide their true identities while exploiting the plaintiffs’ protected works through methods such as URL redirection and masking for their own benefit.

 He noted that such entities were increasingly emerging and needed to be stopped promptly, failing which the legitimate rights of parties like the plaintiffs would be seriously threatened.

The Judge stated that in the present circumstances, since the plaintiffs lawfully owned the intellectual property rights both for their original works and the licensed exclusive broadcasts, they were fully entitled to seek and receive legal protection, particularly because the defendants were carrying out these infringing acts without any authorisation, permission, or legal right from the plaintiffs.

 He recorded that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case against the defendants, and the balance of convenience also favoured granting relief to them, as denial of an ex parte ad interim injunction would cause them irreparable loss and injury. He further noted that the plaintiffs were seeking a ‘dynamic+’ injunction, a type of relief that courts had granted in similar recent matters to protect rightful owners from rapidly developing online infringement platforms.

The Judge concluded that such relief was necessary in this case because the exclusive rights related to the FIFA World Cup, and any delay in blocking the rogue websites would result in irreparable harm and violate the plaintiffs’ intellectual property rights.

Also Read: Punjab & Haryana HC Upholds Summoning Of Punjab Cops In Custodial Death Case | Under S.210(1)(c) BNSS Court Need Not Record Witness Statements Or Call Aggrieved Party To Take Cognizance Of Offence

The court directed that during the pendency and after the conclusion of the FIFA Club World Cup 2025, if any further domain names, including mirror, redirect, or alphanumeric variations of the domains associated with the defendant websites are discovered which are illegally streaming and communicating content over which the plaintiffs have rights, the plaintiffs will be at liberty to communicate the details of these domain names to their concerned domain name registrars, if available, or in the alternative to Defendant Nos. 12 to 20 being the internet service providers for blocking the said websites.

Upon receiving such intimation from the plaintiff, the concerned internet service providers and domain name registrars shall take steps to immediately block the said domain names associated with the defendant websites on a real-time basis.

The court issued notice to the defendants through all permissible modes returnable before the court on 08.10.2025. Replies, if any, were directed to be filed within four weeks from the date of service. Rejoinders thereto, if any, were directed to be filed within two weeks thereafter. The matter was listed before the court on 08.10.2025.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioners: Mr. Siddharth Chopra, Mr. Yatinder Garg, Mr. Akshay Maloo, and Ms. Ishi Singh, Advocates

Case Title: DAZN Limited & Anr. v. Buffsports.me & Ors.

Case Number: CS(COMM) 536/2025

Bench: Justice Saurabh Banerjee