15 Asian Legal Business | December 2024 The Briefs Dynamic injunctions reshaping fight against online piracy in Singapore Online piracy has long been a thorn in the side of content creators and distributors worldwide. As pirates adapt their tactics, employing ever more sophisticated methods to evade detection and circumvent traditional legal barriers, the entertainment industry has been forced to evolve its strategies. In 2018, Singapore made a significant leap forward in this ongoing struggle, setting a precedent that would ripple across the global legal landscape. The landmark case of Disney Enterprises, Inc and others v M1 Ltd and others [2018] marked a turning point in Singapore’s approach to combating online piracy. For the first time, the High Court granted a dynamic site-blocking injunction, compelling internet service providers (ISPs) to block not only known infringing sites but also future domains or IP addresses identified as hosting pirated materials. This innovative legal tool is aimed at addressing the whack-a-mole nature of online piracy, where blocked sites could quickly resurface under new domains. Since this groundbreaking decision, dynamic injunctions have proven to be a powerful weapon in the arsenal of copyright holders. Meryl Koh, director of intellectual property and dispute resolution at Drew & Napier, explains their effectiveness: “Dynamic injunctions can compel internet service providers to block access to websites or URLs that are hosting copyright infringing pirated content. Since many pirate sites are frequently relocated or rebranded through the use of different URLs, dynamic injunctions compel ISPs to block not just known infringing sites but also new domains or IP addresses that are identified in the future as hosting pirated materials.” The impact of these injunctions has been significant, particularly in the realm of sports broadcasting. “In March 2024, it was once again reported that in an effort to tackle illegal streaming throughout Asia, the EPL had successfully obtained an order from the Singapore High Court to force internet service providers such as M1 and Singtel to block access to 25 illegally streaming sites that illegally stream football matches,” says Koh. “As a result, more than 460 domains in Singapore were blocked.” The scope of these injunctions has expanded beyond traditional websites to include illegal streaming applications. “The significance of the EPL orders is that not only are illegal streaming sites targeted, but illegal applications preinstalled on illegal streaming devices as well,” she observes. “These examples show that the Singapore court is respectful of intellectual property and is inclined to assist copyright owners combat online piracy.” While dynamic injunctions offer a robust solution, they are not without limitations. “Rightsholders need not rely only on going after the infringers who are more likely to evade accountability,” Koh says. “Obtaining dynamic injunctions against ISPs may well be the more preferred course of action for an effective solution. That said, while dynamic injunctions offer a solution to the proliferation of infringing content, they do not stop infringers from first posting infringing content online.” As the digital landscape evolves, so too do the tactics of those seeking to circumvent these legal barriers. “Growing rampant are websites illegally downloading, uploading, using, and/or distributing copyrighted material – such as movies, music, games, books – for free to the public without permission or authorisation from the copyright owner,” she explains. “A well-known tactic adopted by infringers is to use multiple domain names, URLs, and/or IP addresses – also known as Fully Qualified Domain Names or FQDNs – to host and make available copyrighted works.” The implementation of dynamic injunctions is not without its challenges. Koh points out a practical limitation: “Even after obtaining a dynamic injunction against an NCP, copyright owners would still have to continually scan the internet for the additional FQDNs encompassed by the successful main injunction. While large copyright owners, such as Disney Enterprises, Inc, likely have the technological capabilities, or at least the financial resources to track and uncover the new FQDNs, smaller producers/owners of copyrighted works may struggle.” The global nature of online piracy necessitates a comparative look at international approaches. Koh notes, “As there is comparatively less jurisprudence on dynamic injunctions in Singapore, it is in fact the practices of other jurisdictions that has and would likely continue to influence the practices in Singapore. However, every reported decision in Singapore will no doubt be relied on or at least serve as a reference point for future cases, especially in common law countries where copyright legislation(s) are similar.”
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjA0NzE4Mw==