After decades of controlling all aspects of spaceflight, the Indian government decided in 2020 to open things up to private industry. Essentially, the government said, companies could build their own rockets, obtain permission to launch them, and even use state-operated facilities.

The government and the country's space agency, ISRO, instituted this change in response to the rise of commercial space industries in the United States, and later China, that were playing an increasingly important role in global spaceflight.

Now, six years later, this structural shift is beginning to bear some fruit. The most promising Indian launch company, Skyroot Aerospace, is nearing the pad with its first orbital rocket.

Read full article

Comments

Pirate sites and services can be a real challenge for rightsholders to deal with. In India, however, recent court orders have proven to be quite effective.

Indian courts have issued pirate site blocking orders for over a decade. Initially, these orders were relatively basic, requiring local Internet providers to block specific domain names.

These regular injunctions were only partially effective. After the High Court granted a blocking injunction, pirate sites would often switch to new domains, requiring rightsholders to return to court to get these blocked as well.

Expanding Site Blocking Injunctions

To deal with this problem, the dynamic injunction was invented. These orders were issued to block pirate sites more effectively. ISPs were not only required to block original domains but also any clones and mirror sites that surfaced after the case was finalized.

When dynamic injunctions were no longer sufficient to slay the piracy hydra , rightsholders suggested upgrading the Indian blocking regime with Dynamic++ injunctions. These orders also protect copyrighted content that has yet to be registered.

In addition, Dynamic++ orders and their ‘ superlative ‘ variant also include domain name registrars as defendants . This includes blocking orders targeted at U.S. domain registrars, much to the delight of U.S. rightsholders .

Delhi High Court Slams the Brakes

The expanding scope of these orders has not gone unquestioned. In a recent ruling in a trademark case, the Delhi High Court has put a hard limit on the addition of new domain names, creating a strong divergence with earlier dynamic site blocking orders that were previously issued by the same High Court.

The case itself started as a routine trademark dispute. Mahindra and Mahindra, one of India’s largest conglomerates, sued a string of packers and movers businesses operating under domain names that incorporated the “MAHINDRA” mark.

The court ordered GoDaddy and other registrars to block five infringing domains, directed India’s telecoms regulator to instruct ISPs to do the same, and required Google to delist the relevant results. All parties complied with this order.

When the case reached its conclusion earlier this year, Mahindra requested to make the order future-proof. The company asked the court to allow a court official to add newly discovered mirror and redirect domains to the blocking order on an ongoing basis, without the need to return to a judge each time.

To back up this request, Mahindra pointed to two Delhi High Court rulings that implemented the same procedure: a 2019 decision against 1337x, The Pirate Bay, and others , and a 2023 ruling targeting cyberlocker sites including Mixdrop .

The same procedure had been used routinely in piracy cases ever since, so the company did not expect much pushback. However, after reviewing the matter, Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said no .

Case Closed

The reason for the denial comes down to a straightforward point about how courts work. Once a judge signs a final ruling and closes a case, the court’s authority over that matter ends. It can still fix typos and calculation errors, but it cannot reopen proceedings to add new defendants or extend the reach of its orders.

That principle applies directly here. Once the case was closed, the blocking order against the original five domains became part of the final judgment.

Additionally, Justice Gedela said that it is “beyond comprehension” that a court officer could add new parties and extend dynamic injunctions, even when the judge no longer has the power to do so.

According to Tejaswini Kaushal, analyst at the Indian intellectual property publication SpicyIP , rightsholders can still request injunctions under the new ruling. However, they will have to file a new proceeding to block additional domains after a case is closed.

“This means that practitioners will now have to rely on execution proceedings or initiate fresh litigation to address new instances of infringement,” Kaushal writes .

The ruling effectively creates a divergence between judges of the same court. A rights holder appearing before a different Delhi HC judge could receive the opposite answer today. The question will remain unsettled until a higher bench resolves it.

Legislature, Step In

Justice Gedela did not leave the matter there. The judgment calls on India’s Parliament to update is civil procedure rules and regulations governing online intermediaries, to create a proper legal basis for post-judgment blocking orders.

“There is an urgent and alarming need for the Central Government and the Legislature to act in haste to bring about radical changes,” the judgment states, noting that rightsholders should not be powerless against new infringers who simply weren’t part of the original proceedings.

The ruling effectively means that infringing domains names that appear after a case closes will now require fresh legal action, at least until a higher court settles the question.

This significantly changes the game for film studios, Netflix, and sports rightsholders who repeatedly relied on post-judgment expansions. They can still get these additional blockades by going back to court, but that means more time, and more money, to achieve the same result.

For now, the ball is in Parliament’s court.

—-

A copy of the judgment in Mahindra and Mahindra Limited & Anr. v. Diksha Sharma Proprietor of Mahindra Packers Movers & Ors. (CS(COMM) 209/2023) is available here .

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

The European football association (UEFA) protects the multi-billion-dollar interests of European football around the globe.

To better protect its content, including the prestigious Champions League competition, it joined the Alliance of Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) last October.

At the time, it seemed likely that the anti-piracy group could help UEFA with their international site-blocking quests. While the organizations did not confirm this at the time, this is precisely what happened.

UEFA Secures Broad Blocking Order

Earlier this month, UEFA obtained a new injunction at the High Court of Delhi. The order was obtained in cooperation with ACE and targets 79 live sports streaming sites, aiming to protect Champions League broadcasts.

The targets include sites such as livetv.sx, vipbox.lc, and footybite.to, which each had several million monthly visits. According to UEFA, all domain names combined were good for 2 billion annual visits, which makes this one of the most significant anti-piracy injunctions in recent times.

The order mentions 23 “rogue” piracy operations as defendants, with many using multiple domains. Indian ISPs, who are also listed as defendants, must block these domains across their network.

Importantly, the order also includes twenty domain name registrars as defendants. This includes U.S. based and globally operating intermediaries such as GoDaddy, Tucows, Squarespace Domains, and Dynadot. These companies must lock and suspend all 79 listed domains.

In addition to suspending the domain names, the registrars must also share any personal information they store on the operators, including their email addresses, payment details, and mobile numbers.

Global Reach

The new blocking order is valid for the remainder of the Champions League season. UEFA can notify registrars and ISPs directly when it discovers new infringing sites. These intermediaries must then lock or block the newly identified domains immediately, without the need to go back to court.

This so-called “Dynamic+” blocking mechanism, which Indian courts have been refining since at least 2019, aims to make it harder for pirate operators to simply register a new domain and continue as if nothing happened.

The strategy has proven to be effective in India, where ISPs are swift to implement the blocking orders. However, UEFA was quick to highlight that the reach of the order extends beyond Indian borders.

“Implemented in India through Internet Service Providers and also domain level intermediaries with global reach, these measures are expected to significantly disrupt access to the targeted services, including through global domain suspension mechanisms,” UEFA commented.

The phrase “global domain suspension mechanisms” refers to the fact that internationally operating registrars are defendants. This could mean that domain suspensions can take effect worldwide, not just for users in India. After all, a locked or suspended domain is inaccessible everywhere, regardless of which ISPs are blocking it locally.

Mixed Results

These types of orders have been successful in the past, with registrars including NameCheap , NameSilo, and Porkbun taking action in response to Indian court orders. However, site operators are increasingly aware of this and may choose more resilient alternatives.

At the time of writing, only the Namecheap-registered domain livetv819.me appears to have been placed on clienthold. The majority of the 79 listed domains remain active at the registrar level, with some redirecting to new domains.

This includes LiveTV and VIPBox, which had 10 and 13 million monthly visits in January of this year, according to Similarweb data.

While none of the registrars has commented publicly on the order, it seems likely that some refrain from taking action because they don’t fall under the jurisdiction of an Indian court.

UEFA and its commercial arm, UC3, remain optimistic, with Managing Director Guy Laurent Epstein celebrating the win as a step forward.

“These orders represent a clear step forward: dynamic blocking strengthens the protection of our global family of broadcast partners, preserving the value they deliver to fans and enabling continued investment throughout the European football ecosystem.”

UEFA is not alone in this assessment. Earlier this month, the International Intellectual Property Alliance applauded the Indian “lock and suspend” orders in their annual “Special 301” recommendation to the U.S. Trade Representative.

—

A copy of the order handed down by the High Court of Delhi is available here ( pdf ).

The order names 23 piracy operations as defendants, spread across 79 domains. The table below lists each defendant, its domains, and the registrar responsible for suspending them.

#	Defendant	Domains	Registrar(s)
1	livetv.sx	livetv.sx, cdn.livetv860.me, cdn.livetv861.me, cdn.livetv863.me, livetv819.me, livetv872.me, livetv869.me, livetv863.me, livetv868.me, livetv854.me, livetv855.me, livetv858.me	Ascio Technologies Inc.; Hosting Concepts B.V.; NameCheap Inc.
2	streameast100.is	streameast100.is, istreameast.app	N/A
3	strmd.link	strmd.link, streamed.pk, streamed.su, streamed.st, streami.su	Tucows Inc.; R01-Su; Immaterialism Limited; Rucenter-SU
4	librefutboltv.su	librefutboltv.su, librefutbol.su, futbollibre-tv.su, futbollibre.mx, futbollibreonline.org, futbollibre-tv.org	Active-Su; Ardis-Su; R01-Su; Hosting Concepts B.V.; Tucows Inc.
5	totalsportek.army	totalsportek.army, live4.totalsportek007.com, totalsportek007.com, totalsportekfree.com, totalsportek7.com, totalsportek1000.com, live3.totalsportek777.com	Tucows Inc.
6	pirlotv2.pl	pirlotv2.pl, pirlotv.pl	Key-Systems GmbH
7	rojadirecta.golf	rojadirecta.golf, rojadirecta.men, pirlotv.cc, www.futbolgratis.de, pirlotv.business, rojadirectaenvivo.pl, rojadirecta.ec, rojadirect.site, pirlotvhd.vip, rojadirectatv.lol, rojadirectatvenvivo.me, rojadirectaenvivo.de, rojadirectatv.cv, tarjetarojaenvivo.cx, rojadirectatv.de, rojadirectafhd.com, rojadirecta-tv.net, rojadirectahd.com	Dynadot LLC; Key-Systems GmbH; GoDaddy.com LLC; DonDominio; NameSilo; CentralNic Ltd; Tucows Inc.; TurnCommerce Inc.
8	tarjetarojaenvivo.club	tarjetarojaenvivo.club	Squarespace Domains II LLC
9	viprow.nu	viprow.nu	Hosting Concepts B.V.
10	vipleague.pm	vipleague.pm, vipleague.st	Hosting Concepts B.V.; Immaterialism Limited
11	livesports088.com	livesports088.com	GoDaddy.com LLC
12	pelotalibrevivo.net	pelotalibrevivo.net, pelotalibretv.su, pelotalibre.org, pelotalibrehd.org	Squarespace Domains LLC; Ardis-Su; NameCheap Inc.; Tucows Inc.
13	fawanews.sc	fawanews.sc	Name.com Inc.
14	redditsoccerstreams.biz	redditsoccerstreams.biz, redditsoccerstreams.name	TLD Registrar Solutions Ltd.; Key-Systems GmbH
15	streambtw.live	streambtw.live	N/A
16	footybite.to	footybite.to	Government of the Kingdom of Tonga
17	sportsurge100.is	sportsurge100.is	N/A
18	hesgoal.footybite.to	hesgoal.footybite.to, hesgoal.watch	Government of the Kingdom of Tonga; TLD Registrar Solutions Ltd.
19	soccer-1000.com	soccer-1000.com, soccer-free.com, socceronline.me	Tucows Inc.; Immaterialism Limited
20	daddyhd.com	daddyhd.com, dlhd.dad, daddylivestream.com, dlhd.link	Tucows Inc.
21	streameasthd.com	streameasthd.com	Tucows Inc.
22	vipbox.lc	vipbox.lc	Immaterialism Limited
23	vipstand.pm	vipstand.pm	Hosting Concepts B.V.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Pirate sites and services can be a real challenge for rightsholders to deal with. In India, however, recent court orders have proven to be quite effective.

Indian courts have issued pirate site blocking orders for over a decade. Initially, these orders were relatively basic, requiring local Internet providers to block specific domain names. However, these early orders have evolved quite a bit since then.

In 2023, several Hollywood studios obtained a seminal court order that significantly expanded the scope. In addition to requesting Indian Internet providers to block pirate sites, it also required domain registrars to “lock and suspend” the domain names while sharing registrant data with the rightsholders.

This broad Delhi court order became a new standard going forward. American rightsholders used it against a wide variety of pirate sites and, through this Indian route, they targeted American domain registrars such as Namecheap and Porkbun. Effectively, the Delhi High Court now has the power to take domains offline worldwide.

U.S. Rightsholders Praise Indian Model

Thus far, U.S. rightsholders have not commented in great detail on these Indian efforts. However, the International Intellectual Property Alliance ( IIPA ), which represents the interests of prominent rightsholder groups, including the MPA and RIAA, recently highlighted it.

IIPA makes its remarks in its annual “ Special 301 ” recommendation to the U.S. Trade Representative ( USTR ). This inquiry allows rightsholders to flag shortcomings and concerns in foreign countries.

The IIPA traditionally sees India as a problematic country, and this year it also recommends the USTR put it on the Priority Watch List. However, there is praise too, especially for the site-blocking efforts.

The “lock and suspend” orders, in particular, have helped to (temporarily) take out hundreds of pirate sites. This includes targets such as Animeflix, Vegamovies Fmovies , SFlix, VidSrc , and many others .

“To date, more than 400 piracy domains have been completely wiped from the Internet, representing billions of global piracy visits,” IIPA writes.

“Rights holders are encouraged by the Delhi High Court’s progressive understanding of the technologies involved in modern digital piracy and its resolve to grant creative relief to truly tackle piracy on a global scale.”

Effective Disruption

IIPA notes that these court orders are “unusually disruptive for pirate operators”. This is in part because they target domain names through U.S. domain registrars. This means that the impact of these court orders is felt globally.

Also, since the domain registrars are required to share the personal details of the domain registrants, these orders can help with follow-up enforcement actions.

These Delhi High Court orders have helped to tackle movie and TV-show piracy, and IIPA suggests that this is also showing in the numbers. Anime and manga are now the dominant piracy categories, with less than 30% of the top pirate sites (ex. music) focused on U.S. movies and TV content.

“This can be said to be at least in part attributable to the consistent orders being made by the Delhi High Court to disable access to all the top pirate film, TV, and streaming sites,” IIPA writes.

Additionally, IIPA highlights enforcement achievements by the local authorities. For example, the high-profile action against the alleged operator of the streaming platform iBomma, who was arrested soon after he landed at Hyderabad Airport.

More Can Be Done

Of course, IIPA’s report isn’t just a summary of positive notes. After all, the group lists India as a high-priority threat, so there is plenty of room for improvement.

“While these promising developments raise hopes that concerted actions can have a positive impact to disrupt the piracy ecosystem, more needs to be done to ensure deterrence becomes the norm to drive would-be pirates from these damaging activities,” IIPA writes.

For example, IIPA complains that some Indian Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are slow to implement the blocking orders passed by the Delhi High Court and calls for tighter timelines.

In addition, not all foreign domain name registrars are complying with the Indian court orders. This means that the global reach of these orders remains limited.

Finally, since broad blocking orders are limited to the Delhi Court, rightsholders recommend replicating these state-level blocking successes nationally across all Indian states.

The site-blocking recommendations are just the tip of the iceberg, however. The IIPA recommends India to undertake a long list of actions, ranging from taking action against illegal camcording in movie theaters to improving the proposed Digital India Act by adding anti-piracy measures.

IIPA’s conclusion is that India deserves to be called out on the USTR’s “Priority Watch List” in the upcoming Special 301 Review. Whether the U.S. government agrees has yet to be seen, but it wouldn’t be a surprise, as India has consistently been marked as a priority threat in recent years.

—

IIPA’s 2026 Special 301 Report on Copyright Protection and Enforcement, which includes all India references, is available here (pdf) .

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Pirate sites and services can be a real challenge for rightsholders to deal with. In India, however, recent court orders have proven to be quite effective.

Indian courts have issued pirate site blocking orders for over a decade. Initially, these orders were relatively basic, requiring local Internet providers to block specific domain names.

Super Dynamic++ Anti-Hydra Injunctions

These regular injunctions were only partially effective. After the High Court granted a blocking injunction, pirate sites would often switch to new domains, requiring rightsholders to return to court to get these blocked as well.

To deal with this problem, the dynamic injunction was invented. These orders were issued to more effectively deny access to content made available on pirate sites. ISPs were not only required to block original domains but also any clones and mirror sites that surfaced after the order was signed.

When dynamic injunctions were no longer sufficient to slay the piracy hydra , rightsholders suggested upgrading the Indian blocking regime with Dynamic ++ injunctions. These orders also protect copyrighted content that has yet to be registered.

In addition, Dynamic++ orders and their ‘ superlative ‘ variant also include domain name registrars as defendants . This includes blocking orders targeted at U.S. domain registrars.

Hollywood Targets U.S. Companies Through India

The ability to target domain name registrants proved to be a game changer. Over the past two years, it allowed rightsholders to disable domains of various prominent pirate sites, some with dozens of millions of visitors. While these sites could simply register new domains, the legal efforts certainly affected their operation.

For this reason, it is no surprise to see that several American movie industry players have ramped up their enforcement actions in India, targeting hundreds of domains at a time. And since these orders effectively suspend domains at various domain name registrars, new requests keep coming in.

As reported by Verdictum a few days ago, the High Court in New Delhi issued a new blocking injunction on December 18, targeting more than 150 pirate site domains , including yflix.to, animesuge.bz, bs.to, and many others.

The complaint is filed by Warner Bros., Apple, Crunchyroll, Disney, and Netflix, which are all connected to the MPA’s anti-piracy arm, ACE. The referenced works include some of the most pirated titles , such as Stranger Things, Squid Game, and Silo.

Global Kill Switch Fails

In addition to targeting Indian ISPs, the order also lists various domain name registries and related organizations as defendants. This includes American registrars such as Namecheap and GoDaddy, but also the government of the Kingdom of Tonga, which is linked to .to domains.

By requiring domain name registrars to take action, the Indian court orders have a global impact.

In addition to suspending the domain names within three days days, the domain name registrars are given four weeks to disclose the relevant subscriber information connected to these domains.

“[The registrars] shall lock and suspend Defendant Nos. 1 to 47 websites within 72 hours of being communicated with a copy of this Order and shall file all the Basic Subscriber Information, including the name, address, contact information, email addresses, bank details, IP logs, and any other relevant information […] within four weeks of being communicated with a copy of this Order,” the High Court wrote.

Not All Domain ‘Registrars’ Comply

While the “Dynamic+” injunction is designed to be a global kill switch, its effectiveness depends entirely on the cooperation of the domain name registrars. Since most of these are based outside of India, their compliance is not guaranteed.

By now, the 72-hour deadline to comply has long passed, so we can effectively see which registrars have taken action and which ones haven’t.

According to our analysis, it appears that most domain names have not been suspended. These pirate sites domains continue to be accessible today. Some continue running from their original domains, while others redirect to new ones, suggesting that they remain controlling their original owners.

This includes domains that are linked to Namecheap, Tucows, GoDaddy, NameSilo, Dynadot, OVH and others. The government of the Kingdom of Tonga did not comply with the Indian court order either.

As far as we can see, domains linked to the American registrar Porkbun, the UK-based WHG Hosting services, and the Lithuanian registrar Hostinger were fully suspended. Registrar.eu also put some domains on clientHold, and the one that remains accessible (animesuge.bz) is linked to Namecheap now.

It’s not unprecedented for foreign companies, including American ones, not to comply with Indian court orders. However, in this case, it is worth noting that Namecheap previously appeared to comply with similar orders from the Delhi High Court.

The non-compliance must come as a disappointment to Netflix, Warner Bros. and the others. However, they will likely be back in court for more blocking and suspension orders son enough.

All in all, it is clear that India’s High Court has a streamlined process in place that effectively orders local ISPs to block pirate sites. However, the intended global reach seems to be restricted to a few registrars, for now.

—

A copy of the High Court order, issued on December 18, 2025, by Justice Tejas Karia, is available here (pdf) . The court order includes 163 unique domain names, some of which are not linked to a registrar. An overview of the 125 domains that are linked to targeted registrars and related entities is provided below. .

Domain Name Registrar	Domain Names
Porkbun LLC	hdmoviehub.beer
Tucows Domains Inc.	hdtoday-to.lol, hdtoday-tv.lol
NameSilo, LLC	movies4u.vip, desiremovies.party, desiremovies.ist, desiremovies.onl, desiremovies.faith, desiremovies.review, animeacademy.in, uhdmovies.stream, toono.in, watchanimeworld.in, fmovies-co.net, animesalt.com, flixmomo.org, flixbaba.net, boredflix.com, wmovies.one, cuevana3.vip, animeworld-india.me, moviemaze.cc, streamingunity.co, pelisflix1.ink, pelisflix1.fun, pelisflix1.lol, pelisflix1.fit, pelisflix1.icu, pelisflix1.xyz, pelisflix1.site, pelisflix1.work, pelisflix1.com, pelisflix20.hair
Government of Kingdom of Tonga	pelisflix20.casa, pelisflix20.press, pelisflix20.help, pelisflix20.onl, pelisflix20.mom, pelisflix20.buzz, pelisflix20.pics, yflix.to, anigo.to, watchflix.to, 24drama.to, s.to, bs.to
OVH, SAS	pelisflix20.autos, pelisflix20.lol, pelisflix20.xyz, pelisflix20.icu, pelisflix20.rest, pelisflix20.one, pelisflix20.wiki, pelisflix20.bid, pelisflix20.ceo, pelisflix20.co, pelisflix20.fun, pelisflix20.top, pelisflix20.cam, pelisflix20.club, pelisflixhd.icu, pelisflix3.org, www.cuevana2espanol.net, cuevana2espanol.net, streamingcommunity.garden, streamingcommunityz.me, streamingcommunityz.si, streamingcommunityz.casa, streamingcommunityz.bz, streamingunity.bid, streamingunity.blog
Spaceship, Inc.	animesugez.to, animesalt.cc, hdmoviehub.co, lordsanime.in
Immaterialism Limited	fmovies.gd, fmovies-tv.tv, bingeflix.tv
R01-RU	veloratv.ru, hydrahd.ru
Hosting Concepts B.V. d/b/a Registrar.eu	1shows.ru, 1flex.ru, animesuge.bz
Dynadot LLC	dorawatch.net, pelisflix.cat
Namecheap, Inc.	movies4u.sx, [suspicious link removed], cuevana.uno, netmirror.art, mmodlist.com, nekohd.com, dramadrip.com, movies4f.com, 1337x-official.com, yarrlist.com, ogomovies.gg, moviesnation.study, streamingunity.to, www1.playdede.ws, playdede.ws, pelisflix20.me, pelisflix20.com, pelisflix2.ac, pelisflix2.ws, cuevana.biz, w5nv.cuevana.biz, play.cuevana3cc.me, cuevana3cc.me, cuevana3cc.co
Ascio Technologies Inc.	ww4.seeflix.to, seeflix.to
Hostinger Operations, UAB	anitown4u.com, moonflix.in
NETIM	hdtoday.gg, desiremovies.cologne
Key Systems GmbH	animesugetv.se, pelisflix20.at
Gandi SAS	prmovies-to.lol, hdhub4u-to.lol
Internet Domain Service BS Corp.	cinemadeck.com
ua.drs	9anime.org.ua
GoDaddy.com, LLC	moviehd.us
Dreamscape Networks International Pte Ltd	moviepire.net
WHG Hosting services Ltd	anikoto.tv
Webglobe d.o.o.	cuevana3.rs

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In the summer of 2015, the then 29-year-old Priyank Pardeshi was arrested by the police in Pune, a large city in western India.

The authorities and rightsholders saw Priyank as a kingpin in the local piracy scene, and these allegations were widely repeated by many news sites at the time.

Priyank was certainly not a typical pirate site operator. He worked at IBM in California. However, during a work-related visit to his home country, he was suddenly arrested, after investigators found pirated movies on his system while they were collecting evidence in an unrelated matter.

TellyTorrents and Camcording

In addition to Priyank, the authorities also accused two others of being involved in the scheme, which also involved the popular torrent tracker TellyTorrents. This site was a high-profile target, as it was one of the prime locations where the Bollywood blockbuster Bahubali had leaked online.

The case seemed fairly straightforward too. According to the police, the alleged piracy kingpin confessed to running TellyTorrents, earning huge sums in revenue, and storing 1,243 pirated movies. Not just that, he allegedly also revealed that they were involved in camcording films in local theaters for subsequent pirate releases.

These revelations were also shared publicly in the media, to give the case additional weight.

“Priyank revealed that Rahul Mehta of Delhi and Toni of Ghaziabad used to shoot films from cinemas and multiplexes and would prepare their pirated movies. They used to supply it to Jabalpur and many cities across the country and even in Australia and France.”

The Case Collapses (After 10 years…)

Priyank spent 311 days in custody before he was released on bail. While the prosecution seemed convinced that they had a case, it completely fell apart in court a few weeks ago, when a judicial magistrate in Jabalpur fully acquitted the lead defendant and two co-accused due to a lack of evidence.

In a detailed judgment, Magistrate Kishan Dev Singh Patel dismantled the prosecution’s case, revealing that the police investigation was almost entirely devoid of technical evidence.

Despite the serious charges under the Copyright Act and IT Act, the court noted that:

– No Forensics: The police seized computers, laptops, and hard drives but failed to send any items to a forensic lab for analysis. There was no independent verification that the files on the devices were actually pirated movies.

– No Money Trail: Despite claims that “huge profits” were made, the prosecution did not produce a single bank statement or transaction record linking Priyank to the website’s revenue.

– No Domain Link: The police failed to provide any documents to prove that Priyank purchased or owned the TellyTorrents domain name or that he paid for the servers in question.

“There are no documents on record to show that the illegal website TellyTorrents was created/operated by Priyank Pardeshi,” the judgment reads, leaving no other option than to dismiss the claims.

The prosecution relied heavily on testimony from representatives of the Telugu Film Chamber of Commerce in Hyderabad, who acted as expert witnesses. In court, however, these witnesses admitted that there is no hard evidence that Priyank pirated movies or that he operated TellyTorrents.

A Systemic Failure

According to Kartik Sharma, an analyst at the renowned law blog SpicyIP, this acquittal is not an outlier but part of a pattern where Indian law enforcement fails to meet the basic standards of digital evidence.

“The crux of why the acquittal happened is quite evident,” Sharma informs TorrentFreak. “The witnesses from the Telugu Film Chamber acknowledged that they had not seen the accused uploading the pirated movies to the website.”

“Also, there was no testing done by an authorized official agency or lab to establish that the alleged content was pirated.”

Sharma notes that similar lapses have led to acquittals in other high-profile piracy cases, such as State v. Bhushan Kumar in Delhi, where police failed to compare seized VCDs with original copyrighted material.

The weak evidence in these cases, including a lack of digital forensics, is ultimately what leads to a full acquittal of the defendants. However, by then, most of the personal damage is already done.

The Human Cost

While the “kingpin” narrative has been dismantled by the recent court verdict, the decade-long process has taken its toll. Speaking with TorrentFreak, Priyank highlights the human cost.

“I was unable to work for the last 10 years because after I came out of jail, people looked at me like a big criminal,” he says.

“No company would hire me because, during background verification, they could see that a criminal case was pending against me. Other people stopped seeing me as a good person. Even getting married was difficult.”

The other defendants will have similar stories that they will carry with them for the rest of their lives. In this light, it is particularly confronting that one of the co-accused, Dilip Gulwani, passed away while the trial was still ongoing.

A Living Hell

Looking back, the now 40-year-old Priyank feels as if he has been framed, and he’s considering fighting back legally to recoup some of the damages.

Priyank was no stranger to TellyTorrents but notes that his involvement with pirate sites was limited to installing a forum and setting up a website. The earlier-mentioned ‘confession’ was coerced, he alleges.

All in all, the whole experience was traumatizing. While Priyank had no sympathy for the anti-piracy forces that ruined his life, he would caution pirates to reconsider their options. If caught, Bollywood can turn lives into a living hell.

Priyank hopes to continue his life now. He started a family and earns enough to pay the bills. However, he believes that his career would have been much more successful if the criminal piracy prosecution was never started.

iBomma: The New Piracy Kingpin

Interestingly, as the TellyTorrents case concluded, a new alleged Indian piracy ‘kingpin’ was caught. On November 15, the Hyderabad Cyber Crime Police arrested Immadi Ravi as the suspected mastermind behind the popular pirate streaming platform iBomma.

This high-profile takedown occurred shortly after the theatrical release of Baahubali: The Epic (a remastered combination of the film franchise). The original Baahubali film, meanwhile, was at the center of the TellyTorrents case exactly ten years prior.

Notably, the film’s director, S.S. Rajamouli, has also gotten actively involved in the iBomma case and openly thanks the police for their hard work.

As with TellyTorrents at the time, the piracy allegations against Ravi are widely echoed in the press, ranging from a lavish lifestyle financed by millions of dollars in piracy proceeds to forged identity papers . While these could all be true, the TellyTorrents case shows that caution is warranted.

That brings us to the final point of interest, or a lack thereof. While most Indian media is widely reporting on all new allegations in the iBomma case, the acquittal of the criminal defendants in the TellyTorrents case does not get a single mention.

—

A copy of the original TellyTorrents court order, issued by Magistrate Kishan Dev Singh Patel and acquitting all defendants, is available here (pdf) .

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.