SONY Pictures Animation INC v. FLIXHD.CC/ & ORS., CS(COMM) 366/2023 & I.A. 10681/2023, I.A. 10682/2023, I.A. 10683/2023

Posted On - 28 June, 2023 • By - King Stubb & Kasiva

The present case pertains to a case filed by the plaintiff Sony Pictures Animation Inc. against FlixHD.CC &Ors. making an allegation that the movie “SpiderMan: Across The Spider-Verse” whose exclusive rights were vested with the plaintiff was uploaded on various websites by the defendant without any authorisation. The plaintiff further contended that the sole right to broadcast, stream or upload the said content was vested only with themselves and they had not licensed it to anyone outside.

It was prayed by the plaintiff to issue a permanent injunction against the websites of the defendant from any unauthorised distribution, streaming, or selling of the movie to the general public. It was also prayed that the Internet Service Providers (ISP) should block access to those websites which engage in such activities that infringe the rights of the petitioner.

Issues Raised

The issues raised in the present case were as follows:

  1. Whether the copyright claims of the plaintiff were violated by the defendant’s websites through streaming of the film “SpiderMan: Across The Spider-Verse”?
  2. Whether the court could grant a permanent injunction and other reliefs against the defendant’s websites as claimed by the petitioner?

Plaintiff And Respondents’ Arguments

It was argued on behalf of the plaintiff that the illegal streaming of the movie by the defendant’s websites without any license which was already copyrighted by the plaintiff company amounts to a violation of the copyright and therefore the petitioner is entitled to relief in the form of a permanent injunction.

Secondly, it was also stated that the websites that broadcast, stream, and upload copyrighted movies illegally also classified as “rogue websites” fulfill the criteria laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and High Courts in various judgments, and hence the petitioner is entitled to an ex-preorder. The plaintiff also substantiated its claims by referring to provisions under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.


The Hon’ble Court held that the petitioner had fulfilled all essential conditions to be entitled to an interim injunction and other injunctive reliefs against the rogue websites. The court passed an ex-parte restraining order against the defendants by directing the ISPs to curtail access to the defendant’s websites and also instructed the telecom service providers to block the websites as well.


The present decision has reaffirmed the stance of the courts against IPR violations and the proactiveness to deal with the issues of IP violations in the online space. The decision not only conveys the commitment of the judiciary towards curbing piracy activities but also cautions those who intend to violate these rights in the future.