{"id":31220,"date":"2021-05-28T12:28:23","date_gmt":"2021-05-28T06:58:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/?p=31220"},"modified":"2021-05-28T12:31:43","modified_gmt":"2021-05-28T07:01:43","slug":"copyright-judgement-in-india","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/","title":{"rendered":"Copyright Judgement in India: Here are some famous cases"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"has-drop-cap\">Copyright protection is the best way of safeguarding work of art from possible duplication and infringement. But there are instances when the protected work or a logo counterfeited by the defaulters for the sake of profit. The victim in those circumstances left with no other option than to leverage the litigation process. In this write-up, you will across well-known copyright judgement that manifests the effectiveness of our legal system.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title ez-toc-toggle\" style=\"cursor:pointer\">Page Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 eztoc-toggle-hide-by-default' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Copyright_Benefits\" >Copyright Benefits<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#The_Chancellor_Master_And_Scholars_Of_The_University_Of_Oxford_Ors_V_Rameshwari_Photocopying_Services_And_Anr_Cs_Os_24392012\" >The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University Of Oxford &amp; Ors. V. Rameshwari Photocopying Services And Anr., Cs (Os) 2439\/2012<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Eastern_Book_Company_Others_V_DB_Modak_Another_Air_2008_Sc_809\" >Eastern Book Company &amp; Others V. D.B. Modak &amp; Another, Air 2008 Sc 809<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Ratna_Sagar_P_Ltd_V_Trisea_Publications_Ors_1996_Ptc_16_597\" >Ratna Sagar (P) Ltd. V. Trisea Publications &amp; Ors., 1996 Ptc (16) 597<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Najma_Heptulla_V_Orient_Longman_Ltd_Air_1989_Del_63\" >Najma Heptulla V. Orient Longman Ltd., Air 1989 Del 63,<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Hawkins_Cooker_Ltd_V_Magicook_Appliances_100_2002_Dlt_2008\" >Hawkins Cooker Ltd. V. Magicook Appliances, 100 (2002) Dlt 2008<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Super_Cassettes_Industries_Ltd_V_Yahoo_Inc_Anr_CS_OS_11242008\" >Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. V Yahoo Inc. &amp; Anr, C.S. (O.S.) 1124\/2008<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Super_Cassettes_Industries_Limited_V_Youtube_Google\" >Super Cassettes Industries Limited V. Youtube &amp; Google<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Star_India_P_Ltd_V_Piyush_Agarwal_Ors_CS_OS_No_27222012_Del_Hc\" >Star India (P) Ltd. V. Piyush Agarwal &amp; Ors, C.S. (O.S.) No. 2722\/2012, Del Hc<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/copyright-judgement-in-india\/#Conclusion\" >Conclusion&nbsp;<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Copyright_Benefits\"><\/span> Copyright Benefits  <span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul><li>Public record of ownership <\/li><li>Prima Facie evidence <\/li><li>Claim of damages <\/li><li>Improves product&#8217;s market presence <\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Chancellor_Master_And_Scholars_Of_The_University_Of_Oxford_Ors_V_Rameshwari_Photocopying_Services_And_Anr_Cs_Os_24392012\"><\/span>The Chancellor, Master And Scholars Of The University Of Oxford &amp; Ors. V. Rameshwari Photocopying Services And Anr., Cs (Os) 2439\/2012<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The plaintiff sued the\nRameshwari Photostat and the Delhi University for the alleged infringement of\ncopyrightable work, i.e. course material. After examining the case, the court\ntemporary the defendant from reproducing substantial parts of the works of\noriginal publishers, i.e. Cambridge University Press, Taylor &amp; Francis, and\nOxford University Press.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The copyright judgement seems\nto defy the provision of section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act, which states\nthat using\/reproducing\/distributing parts of a protected work without offering\nany payment to the owner can be permissible. In a legal purview, this is known\nas the essence of &#8216;fair dealing&#8217;.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>However, the petitioners had a\ndifferent thought on that as they emphasized the fact that duplication of\ncourse material via photocopying was not covered under the concept of fair\ndealing for private use or research.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Eastern_Book_Company_Others_V_DB_Modak_Another_Air_2008_Sc_809\"><\/span>Eastern Book Company &amp; Others V. D.B. Modak &amp; Another, Air 2008 Sc 809<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>This case was itself puzzling\nbecause of the way deal with the concept of Copyright in India. It also\nquestioned the degree of uniqueness required to copyright a certain work. This\ncase came to light when a plaintiff, Eastern book company, file the petition in\nthe court for the alleged infringement done by the respondents, viz Spectrum\nBusiness Support Ltd and Regent Datatech Pvt Ltd.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The petitioner, a well-known\npublishing house, claimed that the said respondents infringed its work (publication\nof supreme court orders and judgment) in a significant way. The defendant, in\nresponse, claimed that such actions cannot be deemed as copyright because for\nthe following reason&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul><li>The\nfair modification and publication Supreme Court order seeks a great level of\nlegal knowledge and skilled labour.&nbsp;<\/li><li>There\nhas been a minimal level of creativity involved in such a nature of work,\nthereby making it eligible for copyright protection.&nbsp;<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Thus, the petitioner has no\nrights to leverage legal proceeding on the grounds of copyright\nprotection.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The petitioners had tough\ntimes with these facts as these prevent them from winning the case in the lower\nand high court. However, Supreme Court rolled the dices for the petitioners by\nruling the copyright judgement in their favour based on the above ground.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Ratna_Sagar_P_Ltd_V_Trisea_Publications_Ors_1996_Ptc_16_597\"><\/span>Ratna Sagar (P) Ltd. V. Trisea Publications &amp; Ors., 1996 Ptc (16) 597<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>In Ratna Sagar (P) Ltd. v.\nTrisea Publications &amp; Ors., 1996 PTC (16) 597, the petitioner, a renowned\npublisher of children&#8217;s books &#8220;Living Science&#8221;, sued respondent, who\npublished the book &#8220;Unique Science&#8221; for the copyright infringement.\nAccording to the plaintiff, the content available in the defendant&#8217;s book is\ndeceptively similar to theirs. After examining either publication, the court\nheld the respondent guilty of copyright infringement and imposed the perpetual\ninjunction on such an act as per Sections 14 &amp; 19 of the Act. <\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Najma_Heptulla_V_Orient_Longman_Ltd_Air_1989_Del_63\"><\/span>Najma Heptulla V. Orient Longman Ltd., Air 1989 Del 63,<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The petitioner was the legal\nheir of Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, who has provided this work to Prof. Humanyun\nKabir for its translation and narration. The plaintiff had given the copyright\nto the publisher and had rejoiced 50% of royalty for the next 30 years.\nTherefore, the court held that the plaintiff under no circumstance deters the\npublisher from publishing the book after completing the said term.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Hawkins_Cooker_Ltd_V_Magicook_Appliances_100_2002_Dlt_2008\"><\/span>Hawkins Cooker Ltd. V. Magicook Appliances, 100 (2002) Dlt 2008<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Hawkins cooker ltd, the famous Indian brand, sued Magicook Appliances for illicitly using their label used on their renowned pressure cooker line registered under the<strong> Copyright Act, 1957<\/strong><sup><a href=\"https:\/\/www.indiacode.nic.in\/handle\/123456789\/1367?locale=en\"><strong>[1]<\/strong><\/a><\/sup>. The defendants were also deterred from using the plaintiff&#8217;s cookbooks and were ordered to deliver up to the petitioner company for damage all alleged product, books, and articles employed by the defendants in the manufacturing of the offending goods. The plaintiff is also eligible to claim damages incurred by the defendants due to rendition of accounts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Super_Cassettes_Industries_Ltd_V_Yahoo_Inc_Anr_CS_OS_11242008\"><\/span>Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. V Yahoo Inc. &amp; Anr, C.S. (O.S.) 1124\/2008<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Suit for a perpetual\ninjunction preventing copyright infringement triggered by unlawful streaming of\nSCIL&#8217;s copyright works on Yahoo&#8217;s video streaming platform.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Yahoo had taken protection\nunder the DMCA, i.e. Digital Millennium Copyright Act stating that they will\nget rid of infringing material when notified by the owner of the copyright,\nwhich is not applicable in India.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The court passed a copyright judgement preventing respondent, and its agents, offices and representative from violating, adapting, reproducing, or transmitting in any manner on their portal or other violating in any manner the feature films, musical work, or sound recording of the plaintiff claims copyright, without getting an apt <a href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/copyright-registration\"><strong>copyright license<\/strong><\/a> from the plaintiff.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Super_Cassettes_Industries_Limited_V_Youtube_Google\"><\/span>Super Cassettes Industries Limited V. Youtube &amp; Google<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>SCIL claimed that the YouTube\nbusiness model reaps substantial profit from the use of copyrighted work\nuploaded without availing approval from the rightful copyright owners and\nwithout paying any royalty for the same. The High court opined that video\nstreaming giant and Google should stop reproducing, distributing, transmitting,\nor displaying on their portal any audio-visual works which are in the exclusive\nownership of SCIL.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Star_India_P_Ltd_V_Piyush_Agarwal_Ors_CS_OS_No_27222012_Del_Hc\"><\/span>Star India (P) Ltd. V. Piyush Agarwal &amp; Ors, C.S. (O.S.) No. 2722\/2012, Del Hc<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Delhi High court opined\nthat while the performance &amp; sound\/visual recordings of the said\nperformance are covered under copyright protection, the facts from the\nbroadcast were not. After the match&#8217;s broadcast, is it impractical for any\nparty to claim that such information manifested by the performance is not in\nthe public domain. After airing the first broadcast of the performance, the\ninformation presented via performance is in the public domain. Hence, the\nagreement (regarding the 72-hour media right monopoly) between the plaintiff\nand the BCCI is not practical since copyright protection is not available for\ninformation in the public domain.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Conclusion\"><\/span><strong>Conclusion&nbsp;<\/strong><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>It can be concluded from the above-mentioned copyright judgment that the similarity could have an adverse impact on the authenticity of a mark or logo. And while some copyright litigation could lure massive loss for owners, it is imperative to better understand the copyright act before applying for the same.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"text-left\"><b>Read our article<\/b>:<mark style=\"background: #fffd03 !important;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/procedure-to-copyright-a-logo-design-or-name-in-india\/\">Know the Procedure to Copyright a Logo, Design, or Name in India\n<\/a><\/mark><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Copyright protection is the best way of safeguarding work of art from possible duplication and infringement. But there are instances when the protected work or a logo counterfeited by the defaulters for the sake of profit. The victim in those circumstances left with no other option than to leverage the litigation process. In this write-up, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":22,"featured_media":31229,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[190],"tags":[1778],"acf":{"service_id":"21"},"authorName":"Pankaj Tyagi","authorImageUrl":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/MicrosoftTeams-image-42.jpg","authorDescription":"Pankaj has a diverse experience of writing research papers, blog, and articles during his college time. Earlier, he was working as a tax consultant in a financial firm, but his interest in writing drives him to pursue a career in the writing field.","postViews":32055,"readingTime":5,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31220"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/22"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=31220"}],"version-history":[{"count":17,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31220\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":31238,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31220\/revisions\/31238"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/31229"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31220"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31220"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/corpbiz.io\/learning\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31220"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}