UK/HC13F02471/FirstRow BT

From 451wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

File:FirstRow BT.pdf

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

CHANCERY DIVISION

The Honourable Mr Justice Arnold
16 July 2013
CLAIM NO. HC13F02471

Between

THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION PREMIER LEAGUE LIMITED
Claimant/Applicant
-and-
(1) BRITISH SKY BROADCASTING LIMITED
(2) BRITISH TELECOMMUNICATIONS PLC
(3) EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE LIMITED
(4) TALKTALK TELECOM LIMITED
(5) TELEFÓNICA UK LIMITED
(6) VIRGIN MEDIA LIMITED
Defendants/Respondents

ORDER

UPON THE APPLICATION of the Claimant/Applicant ("the Applicant") by notice dated 24 June 2013

AND UPON considering the evidence filed by the Applicant

AND UPON the Court finding that, on the evidence before it, the operators of the FirstRow Websites (as defined below) infringe the copyrights of the Applicant in the UK

IT IS ORDERED as against the Second Defendant/Respondent, British Telecommunications Plc, ("the Second Respondent") as follows:

1. In respect of its customers to whose internet service the system known as Cleanfeed is applied whether optionally or otherwise, the Second Respondent shall within 15 working days in relation to the initial notification (and thereafter within 10 working days of receiving any subsequent notification) adopt the following technical means to block or attempt to block access by its customers to the website currently known as FirstRow Sports currently accessible at the URLs www.firstrowsports.eu, www.firstrow1.eu, www.thefirstrow.eu and any other URLs or IP addresses whose sole or predominant purpose is to enable or facilitate access to the website currently known as FirstRow Sports (hereinafter collectively "the FirstRow Websites"). The FirstRow Websites include any name and URL change to this website notified in writing to the Second Respondent by the Applicant from time to time. The technical means to be adopted is:
(i) IP address re-routing in respect of each and every IP address from which the FirstRow Websites operate and which is notified in writing to the Second Respondent by the Applicant or its agents; and
(ii) DPI-based URL blocking utilising at least summary analysis in respect of each and every URL available at the FirstRow Websites which are notified in writing to the Second Respondent by the Applicant or its agents.
For the avoidance of any doubt this paragraph is complied with if the Second Respondent uses the system known as Cleanfeed and does not require the Second Respondent to adopt DPI-based URL blocking utilising detailed analysis.
2. In respect of its customers to whose internet service the system known as Cleanfeed is applied whether optionally or otherwise, the Second Respondent shall within 15 working days in relation to the initial notification (and thereafter within 10 working days of receiving any subsequent notification) adopt the following technical means to block or attempt to block access by its customers to the FirstRow Websites. The technical means to be adopted is IP address blocking in respect of each and every IP address from which the FirstRow Websites operate and which is:
(i) notified in writing to the Second Respondent by the Applicant or its agents; and
(ii) in respect of which the Applicant or its agents notify the Second Respondent that the server with the notified IP address does not also host a site that is not part of the FirstRow Websites.
3. In respect of its internet service customers who use the Second Respondent’s Domain Name System ("DNS") servers, the Second Respondent shall within 15 working days in relation to the initial notification (and thereafter within 10 working days of receiving any subsequent notification) adopt the following technical means to block or attempt to block access by its customers to the FirstRow Websites. The technical means to be adopted is DNS blocking in respect of the FirstRow Websites which are notified in writing to the Second Respondent by the Applicant or its agents.
4. The Second Respondent shall not be in breach of this Order if it temporarily suspends the technical means described herein upon forming the reasonable view that such temporary suspension is necessary in order to maintain the integrity of its internet service or the functioning of the Cleanfeed system, provided that it notifies the Applicant of such suspension.
5. The Applicant or its agent will notify the Second Respondent should any IP address, URL and/or domain name which has already been notified to the Second Respondent under the terms of the Order cease to enable or facilitate access to the FirstRow Websites (in which case the Second Respondent shall no longer be obliged to block that IP address, URL and/or domain name).
6. For the avoidance of doubt, the Second Respondent is wholly reliant on the Applicant accurately identifying the IP addresses, URLs and/or domain names from which the FirstRow Websites operate and which should be blocked under the terms of the Order. The Second Respondent shall have no obligation to check itself whether the Applicant's determination is correct.
7. The parties have permission to apply on notice in the event of any material change of circumstances including, for the avoidance of doubt but without limiting the generality of the foregoing, in respect of the costs, consequences for the parties and effectiveness of the aforesaid technical means from time to time.
8. The operator(s) of the FirstRow Websites and the operators of any other website who claim to be affected by this order, are to have permission to apply on notice to vary or discharge this order insofar as it affects such an applicant, any such application to be on notice to all the parties and to be supported by materials setting out and justifying the grounds for the application. Any such application shall clearly indicate the status of the applicant and indicate clearly (supported by evidence) that it is the operator of any website which is the subject of such application.
9. There be no order as to costs.

Order sent to

DLA Piper UK LLP 3 Noble Street London EC2V 7EE

Solicitors for the Applicant