One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.
Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.
TL;DR: Building a legal research SaaS by aggregating public court judgments isn’t automatically illegal. But scraping proprietary databases without permission can trigger strong copyright and IT Act notices. The right legal strategy shows that raw judicial decisions are in the public domain and that India doesn’t recognize database rights the way the EU does — and that can turn a threatening notice into a withdrawn claim.
Rohan Gupta built his side project alone. Late nights in Nagpur, fuelled by chai and a belief that good legal research shouldn’t cost a fortune. His product, “JurisIntel,” promised semantic search over every Supreme Court and High Court judgment, plus case-management tools for small-town lawyers who couldn’t afford the big platforms. He scraped publicly visible case data from LexMatrix, a well-known paid legal database. In mid-April 2025, a legal notice landed — alleging copyright infringement, breach of terms, and IT Act violations. The panic was real. A general-practice advocate had told him to just take the site down and pay the settlement demand. The client then approached the Chamber of Advocate Sudhir Rao. Make no mistake, this was more than a tech fight — it was a classic intersection of IP law and public-domain principles. Advocate Sudhir Rao and his office argued that Supreme Court and High Court judgments are not copyrightable as government works under Section 52(1)(q) of the Copyright Act, and that mere arrangement of public data doesn’t enjoy copyright unless it satisfies originality — a high bar after Supreme Court pronouncements. Within six weeks, LexMatrix withdrew the notice and both parties parted without litigation.Key Facts of the Case
- Rohan Gupta, a solo developer from Nagpur, built a legal-research SaaS platform aggregating publicly available court judgments. - The data was sourced by scraping the website of LexMatrix, a proprietary legal database. - In April 2025, LexMatrix sent a legal notice claiming copyright infringement and unauthorized access under the IT Act. - The initial legal advice from a non-specialist attorney recommended immediate shutdown and payment of a settlement amount. - Advocate Sudhir Rao’s intervention demonstrated that raw judicial decisions are in the public domain, and India does not recognize a sui generis database right. - The notice was withdrawn without any payment or litigation, and the platform stayed online.The Direct Legal Answer
Can you legally scrape court judgments to build a SaaS product?
Yes — but only if you are copying the judgments themselves, not a proprietary database’s arrangement, headnotes, or editorial enhancements. Indian copyright law under Section 52(1)(q) explicitly excludes government works from copyright, and this extends to Supreme Court and High Court judgments. However, if you’re ripping an entire curated database along with its unique metadata structure, things get tricky. The line isn’t black and white, so a specialist’s opinion on what exactly was scraped matters enormously.
What if you receive a legal notice — should you comply immediately?
Not necessarily. Many such notices are framed aggressively but lack a solid legal backbone. Panic-driven takedowns and payments only set a bad precedent. A properly drafted reply that invokes the public-domain status of judgments and the absence of database rights in India often defuses the situation.
Advice in Such Cases
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
Don’t reply to the notice yourself. Even a single poorly worded email can be used as an admission against you. Let your advocate draft the response. And here’s the thing — this is not a generic contractual dispute. It crosses IP, IT, and even constitutional principles. A general practitioner may miss crucial distinctions like the difference between a database and the data it contains. Cases like these move faster when the advocate handling them lives and breathes tech-law overlap.
Preserve everything: scraped URLs, timestamps, terms-of-service pages as they existed when you accessed them. Evidence of what was publicly accessible — and whether you bypassed any login wall — decides how the other side frames its demand.
Applicable Sections of Law
- The Copyright Act, 1957 — Section 52(1)(q): reproduction of any judgment of a court is not infringement. - The Information Technology Act, 2000 — Section 43 and 66: unauthorized access and damage, often cited in scraping cases, but requires actual loss or dishonest intent. - The Indian Contract Act, 1872 — Section 2(h) and 10 (breach of website terms), but terms-of-service must be shown to form a binding contract. - No specific database-protection law in India — the Copyright Act protects only original literary compilations under Section 13, not raw factual data.Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case
- If a suit is filed, the civil court of the place where the defendant resides or carries on business, or where the cause of action wholly or partly arises, will have jurisdiction (Sections 16–20 CPC). - For an IT Act complaint, the cybercrime cell or police station with territorial jurisdiction over the complainant’s office can lodge an FIR. - Pecuniary jurisdiction depends on the value of the relief claimed — suits below Rs. 20 lakhs go to the District Court; higher claims to the High Court’s original side. - Choosing the right forum matters because a wrongly filed suit can be returned or dismissed on a preliminary objection, wasting months.Limitation Period
- The limitation for a copyright infringement suit is three years from the date of infringement under Article 88 of the Limitation Act, 1963. - For a breach of contract claim based on website terms, the period is three years from the date the breach occurred. - If the notice is the first formal communication, limitation has likely not expired, but delay weakens the claimant’s position when seeking interim orders.Interim Reliefs Available
- A temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC can restrain the SaaS platform from making the scraped content accessible, pending trial. - The court may also order preservation of server logs and databases under an Anton Piller-style direction, though such orders are rare and require a strong prima facie case. - In our client’s matter, Advocate Sudhir Rao’s office opposed an injunction application by showing that the balance of convenience heavily favoured allowing public access to non-copyrightable court judgments, which prevented any takedown order.If You Are the Victim
- Do not respond to the notice in panic; forward it to your advocate immediately. - Preserve all digital evidence — scraped pages, Wayback Machine snapshots, terms-of-service versions. - Avoid deleting or modifying your website or database unless legally advised; spontaneous deletions can later be construed as guilt. - Get a specialist opinion on the copyrightability of the content you used — many notices collapse when challenged at this stage.Documents You Must Keep Ready
- Identity proof (Aadhaar, PAN) for filing a reply or appearance. - Printout of the legal notice along with its envelope and tracking details. - Screenshots of the terms-of-service page as it appeared on the date of scraping. - Detailed logs of data-fetching activities, including timestamps and IP addresses used. - All correspondence with the opposite party, including emails, WhatsApp messages, or calls. - Technical architecture document of your platform to show data isolation and sourcing.What Evidence Is Required?
- Wayback Machine or archive.is captures proving the judgments were publicly available without a login. - Server logs demonstrating that the scraping was a one-time academic exercise or done without circumventing paywalls. - Affidavits from your development team explaining the technical process. - Expert opinion from a copyright law academic or practitioner on the non-copyrightability of judicial pronouncements. - Evidence of third-party reliance showing your service actually increases access to justice — this often influences the balance-of-convenience analysis in court.How Courts Typically Approach Such Cases
- Indian courts are increasingly protective of public access to law. They lean heavily on Section 52(1)(q) when the core content is raw judicial text. - However, they draw a firm line when defendants have copied proprietary headnotes, editorial summaries, or artificial intelligence-generated indexing that involves independent skill and judgment. - In recent years, several High Courts have refused to grant ex-parte injunctions against legal-tech startups where the plaintiff couldn’t demonstrate originality beyond mere arrangement of public data. - So the outcome often turns on what exactly was scraped — the raw judgment, or the entire curated database ecosystem.Timeline of Legal Process
- Receipt of legal notice — reply typically within 15–30 days. - If the other side files a civil suit, summons may take another 2–4 weeks. - Written statement must be filed within 30 days, extendable to 90 days with court permission. - Interim injunction hearings can conclude within 1–3 months. - If settlement isn’t reached, trial (evidence and arguments) can take 12–24 months, depending on the court’s docket. - A final judgment may take another 3–6 months after closure of arguments. - Appeal before the High Court adds at least another 12–18 months.Understanding the Costs
The total cost of a matter like this varies significantly from one case to the next — it depends on the complexity of the dispute, the forum involved, the number of hearings, and the specific facts of your situation. There is no single fixed figure that applies to everyone.
A professional advocate can give you an accurate estimate only after reviewing all your facts and documents in a consultation.
Can the Matter Be Settled Out of Court?
- Yes, and most such IP/IT disputes do settle. A well-drafted reply often opens the door to a negotiated withdrawal. - Mediation is expressly available under Section 89 of the CPC, and courts routinely refer such matters to a mediator. - In our client’s case, a single legally robust reply by Advocate Sudhir Rao’s office made the other side reconsider — the notice was withdrawn unconditionally. - Even at a pre-litigation stage, a neutral third-party discussion can transform a hostile demand into a licensing or data-sharing agreement.Common Mistakes People Make
- Deleting the website or project code immediately upon receiving a notice — this can be painted as destruction of evidence. - Replying to the notice themselves, conceding facts or promising remedies they can’t deliver. - Assuming that because the judgment text is public, the entire database can be replicated without checking the platform’s terms. - Ignoring the IT Act dimension entirely — even if copyright fails, the other side may push Sections 43 and 66 for unauthorized access. - Waiting too long to seek specialized advice; early intervention prevents escalation. - Engaging an advocate without specific experience in tech-and-IP-overlap matters. Domain-specific knowledge here is not a luxury — it’s the difference between a quiet withdrawal and a full-blown trial. A generalist may not immediately spot that the absence of database rights in India changes the entire liability analysis.FAQs People Normally Have
- Can I scrape judgments from free sites like eCourts? Generally yes, eCourts portals host government works. But check the specific terms — some portals require explicit permission for bulk automated access. - What if my SaaS tracks user behaviour inside the app — does that add liability? That’s a separate privacy angle under the upcoming Digital Personal Data Protection Act, but not directly linked to the scraping notice. Still, disclose data practices clearly. - Will I get arrested if I don’t comply with the notice? Arrest in a purely civil copyright dispute is unlikely unless there’s a criminal complaint under Section 63 of the Copyright Act and the police establish a prima facie case. Civil demands rarely lead to arrests. - Is it better to incorporate a company before launching? Yes. A private limited company limits personal liability; the legal notice will go to the company, not you personally. That’s a crucial structural shield.This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate about your specific situation.
Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India