Delhi High Court Allows Real-Time Blocking Of New F1 Italian Grand Prix Piracy Websites Sought By FanCode

The Delhi High Court has allowed Sporta Technologies Pvt. Ltd., which owns the FanCode streaming platform, to notify domain registrars, hosting entities, and internet service providers directly about newly discovered piracy websites streaming Formula One and other sporting events licensed to it. The company need not file a fresh application each time.

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav passed the order on October 1, supplementing an interim injunction granted on September 10. Under the mechanism, domain registrars and hosting entities must suspend or lock the relevant domains, while internet service providers must block access within 24 hours of receiving Sporta's communication. Authorities responsible for notifying ISPs must issue the corresponding notifications within 36 hours.

“An injunction is granted to protect a right in a real and effective manner. If the order can be circumvented by the infringer simply by moving the same unlawful activity to a new address on the internet, the injunction would remain only on paper,” the Court observed.

Sporta approached the Court after discovering websites streaming Practice 1 of the Formula 1 Pirelli Gran Premio d'Italia 2026 in India without authorisation on September 4.

The websites included westreamf1.st, istreameast.cx and livetv903.me, along with nine subdomains hosted on Cloudflare's “pages.dev” service. Some of these subdomains used variants of Sporta's registered FANCODE trademark.

On September 10, the Court had restrained the websites and their unidentified operators from infringing Sporta's broadcast reproduction rights in ongoing and forthcoming sporting events covered by seven licensing agreements. It had also prohibited them from using the FANCODE trademark or deceptively similar variants.

However, the earlier order did not specify how newly discovered piracy websites should be brought to the attention of domain registrars and hosting entities. Sporta sought further directions to address this gap, arguing that mirror websites could emerge within minutes and that requiring a fresh application for each website would defeat the purpose of the injunction.

No one appeared for the defendants.

The Court noted that a procedure requiring an application supported by an affidavit before the Registrar could work for films and series, which retain their commercial value over time. However, live sporting events have a limited commercial window.

It said this “does not, however, answer the difficulty of a live sporting event, the value of which is concentrated in the few hours during which the event is played.”

The Court also emphasised that intermediaries cannot be given the power to decide whether a website is a rogue website warranting blocking. The ultimate determination must remain with the Court, it said, adding that this principle could be preserved through a mechanism tailored to live sporting events.

Under the mechanism approved by the Court, Sporta can email details of newly discovered websites, mirrors, redirects, alphanumeric variants, subdomains or URLs streaming the covered sporting events in India.

Each communication must identify the website or URL, the event, and the date and time of detection. It must also include supporting evidence, such as screenshots or recordings of the infringing stream and the IP address, wherever available.

The directions will remain in force during the subsistence of the interim injunction and for the period of Sporta's rights under the relevant licensing agreements.