India’s largest streaming firm files criminal complaint against ExpressVPN over marketing claims

India’s leading streaming and entertainment company JioStar has filed a criminal complaint against ExpressVPN, escalating a long-running dispute between rights holders and privacy technology providers. The complaint was reportedly lodged at the Noida Cyber Crime Police Station and centres on claims that ExpressVPN’s marketing encourages users to bypass geographical restrictions on copyrighted content.

According to reports, JioStar argues that the wording used in ExpressVPN’s promotional material goes beyond describing a privacy tool and instead actively promotes methods to access content that would otherwise be blocked. The company claims this approach effectively supports copyright infringement by guiding users on how to circumvent regional licensing restrictions.

The complaint challenges the notion that VPN services should be considered neutral utilities. “This is not a case of a neutral tool being misused,” the complaint states, arguing that ExpressVPN has positioned itself as a “knowing facilitator and inducer” of geo-restriction bypass. JioStar holds exclusive digital and broadcast rights to major sporting events, such as the Indian Premier League, and says unauthorised access undermines its commercial agreements.

JioStar also alleges that ExpressVPN’s marketing suggests users can virtually change their location to watch content “for free” or from unauthorised regions. The company claims this messaging makes the provider complicit in piracy by encouraging behaviour that violates copyright and licensing rules.

ExpressVPN has been contacted for comment on the allegations, but has not issued a public response at the time of publication.

Debate over ‘neutral tools’ and inducement intensifies

The complaint raises broader questions about how the law treats technology platforms that can be used for both legitimate and illicit purposes. VPN providers have traditionally argued that they are neutral intermediaries and cannot be held responsible for how customers use their software, much as manufacturers of recording devices are not liable for illegal copying by users.

JioStar’s complaint appears to challenge that defence by focusing on the concept of inducement. By allegedly promoting features designed to defeat geo-blocking systems used by streaming platforms, the company argues that ExpressVPN has stepped beyond being a neutral service and into actively encouraging infringement.

This legal challenge comes amid an increasingly strict regulatory environment for VPN providers in India. In 2022, the country’s computer emergency response agency introduced rules requiring certain data logging practices. Several VPN companies, including ExpressVPN, responded by removing physical servers from India to avoid collecting user data under the new requirements.

Now, providers are facing legal scrutiny not only over data retention but also over how they promote their services. For streaming audiences, the ability to access content from other regions has been a key selling point for VPNs. Still, rights holders argue that this undermines territorial licensing agreements and subscription models.

The case highlights a growing tension between privacy advocates and copyright owners. Privacy groups argue that VPNs are essential for protecting user data and bypassing censorship, while media companies claim that the same tools facilitate widespread piracy and revenue loss.

Global pressure mounts on VPN providers and streaming access

The complaint in India is part of a broader international trend in which rights holders are targeting the infrastructure that enables access to unauthorised content rather than only pursuing pirate websites. In Europe, media companies and industry bodies have been pressing for greater responsibility from VPN providers, arguing that they should help prevent copyright infringement.

Sports organisations have also taken legal action. In Spain, La Liga recently secured a court order requiring NordVPN and Proton VPN to block illegal football streams. VPN companies criticised the ruling, arguing that such measures are technically difficult and risk undermining user privacy by forcing providers to monitor traffic.

Courts in France have also issued multiple blocking orders against popular VPN services, including ExpressVPN, signalling a willingness to place more responsibility on intermediaries. These decisions suggest a shift in how regulators and courts view the role of VPN providers in the online ecosystem.

JioStar’s criminal complaint suggests that India may be joining this global push, using criminal law rather than civil injunctions to pressure VPN services. If the case progresses, it could set a precedent that affects how VPN companies market their products, particularly claims about unblocking content and changing virtual locations.

Industry observers say the outcome could reshape the relationship between streaming platforms and privacy tools. VPN providers have long promoted access to global content libraries as a key benefit, but legal pressure may force them to tone down such messaging or adjust their services.

At the same time, consumer demand for privacy and unrestricted access to information remains strong. Any attempt to restrict VPN functionality or marketing could spark further debate over digital rights, censorship, and the balance between intellectual property protection and online freedom.

For now, the complaint marks a significant escalation in the ongoing conflict between rights holders and privacy technology companies. It also underscores the growing willingness of regulators and courts to scrutinise not just how tools are used, but how they are marketed to consumers.