The Madras High Court on February 18 permitted Reliance Industries Limited’s media arm Jio Studios to withdraw its commercial suit seeking wide-ranging anti-piracy directions against telecom service providers, internet service providers and cable operators in relation to the film Dhurandhar [Reliance Industries Limited Vs BSNL].
Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy recorded the withdrawal after Reliance's counsel informed the Court that instructions had been received to withdraw the suit. The Court consequently dismissed the case as withdrawn without costs and closed the connected interim applications.
Reliance Industries Limited (through Jio Studios) had filed the commercial suit under the Copyright Act, 1957 seeking permanent injunctions to curb online and cable piracy of the cinematographic film Dhurandhar.
The company had arrayed a wide set of defendants including major telecom operators, ISPs, cable networks and digital service providers such as Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, MTNL, Bharti Airtel, Vodafone Idea, Tata Communications, Sify Technologies, Hathway, GTPL Hathway, Asianet Satellite Communications, Spectra ISP Networks and several regional cable operators.
The relief sought was in the nature of a pre-release anti-piracy order commonly sought by film producers.
Reliance had asked the Court to direct telecom and internet intermediaries to block websites hosting infringing copies of the film once notified of such infringement.
The suit also sought injunctions against cable operators and other entities to prevent cam-cording, recording, reproduction, transmission, distribution or communication of the film across any medium, including cable TV, DTH, internet services, storage devices and satellite systems.
On December 5, the Court granted an interim injunction restraining cable operators and internet service providers from broadcasting pirated versions of the film.
When the matter came up on February 18, counsel for Reliance submitted that the company had decided to withdraw the proceedings and made an endorsement to that effect.
Recording the submission, the Court passed a brief order stating that the suit was dismissed as withdrawn without any order as to costs. The connected interim applications were also closed.
No reasons for the withdrawal were recorded in the order.
Reliance was represented by Advocate S Deepak, briefed by PK Law Firm.
[Read Order]