- The Madras High Court in India handed out one of the biggest site-blocking orders in the world.
- The court order was released to prevent India’s most expensive film from being leaked.
- $76 million has been invested in the movie, and the producers want to protect their investment.
In what seems to be one of the most bizarre moves against piracy, a court in India has pre-emptively blocked 12,564 websites ahead of a major movie release. ‘2.0’ is set to be India’s most expensive movie ever made and it was leaked right after its premiere earlier today. The site-blocking order was released to prevent the ‘pre-DVD rip’ version of the movie from making its way to torrent websites, upon request of Lyca Productions Private Limited, the producer of the sci-fi movie.
According to a local news source, 2000 of the listed websites are owned by a movie website TamilRockers, which is one of the biggest piracy groups in India. It is one of the most aggressive moves against piracy ever seen in any part of the world. India is known for its obsession with movies, and the large-scale production of the movie garnered a lot of hype especially in the southern region of the country.
Despite the blocks in place, users on the Internet are having no trouble obtaining a copy of the movie. With the tag of being the ‘most expensive film’ in India, 2.0 is drawing quite a bit of attention. Arnold Schwarzenegger was initially slated to play a leading role, but things did not work out due to his existing contractual obligations.
The movie has also garnered a bit of controversy in India due to it showing mobile phones in a bad light. The Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) have filed a complaint against the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for showing them to be detrimental to health. The complaint reads the movie is “defamatory to COAI and its members, endangers public order, presents anti-scientific attitudes, constitutes offenses including under various sections of the IPC (Indian Penal Code) and is in violation of the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952”.