Copyright HELD “…. the power to grant ad hoc compulsory licence, cannot be implied. No such detriment is demonstrated. In the absence of an express statutory grant, I would not imply the power to grant an ad hoc compulsory licence by way of interim order by the Copyright Board.” October 5, 2020October 5, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright HELD A conjoint reading of Section 11 of the Copyright Act and Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act clearly indicates that the Appellate Board as constituted under Section 83 of the Trade Marks Act would also have the jurisdiction to perform the functions under the Copyright Act as well. October 5, 2020October 5, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright Copyright Board fixes royalty rate at 2% of the net advertisement revenues of the radio organizations from radio business, charged on pro-rata basis. October 5, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Indian Performing Rites Society vs. Sanjay Dalia wherein the jurisdiction for institution of suits was clarified by the Supreme Court after referring to Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957 and Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the Court inter alia held that a suit can be filed at a place where the plaintiff has a principal place of office and not a subordinate office. September 20, 2020September 20, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright Court agreed to the defendant’s request to grant them (Ropso.com content sharing site) two days time to sit with the plaintiff and ensure legal compliances September 1, 2020September 1, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright LOOTCASE Vs Tukkaa Fitt’s movies, last day injunction sought HELD that the two movies are only similar so far as they revolve around a stolen bag full of money, but since no copyright subsists over themes, plots and ideas, there is no infringement. August 30, 2020August 30, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright Copyright Law–Dramatic work–Provisions of the Act make a distinction between the ‘literary work’ and ‘dramatic work’–Copyright in respect of performance of ‘dance’ would not come within the purview of the literary work but would come within the purview of the definition of ‘dramatic work’–Copyright Act, 1957, Section 2(h) and July 26, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright Are, speeches, lectures, and addresses (collectively referred to as ‘lectures’) forming part of a webinar are copyrightable as literary works under section 13 of the Act if they are scripted (i.e. written in advance). HELD copyright law disfavors protection for short expressions – See Pepsi Co. judgement by the Delhi High Court July 6, 2020July 6, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright Held that a website could be classified as rogue when it was clear that its primary purpose was to provide unauthorized and infringing content to the public, the details of the owners were masked/untraceable, it was non-responsive to legal notices and contained directories or indexes to facilitate infringement of copyright. June 4, 2020 Indian IPR
Copyright Held that the offence of infringement of copyright as provided under Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 is a non-cognizable and bailable offence. May 31, 2020 Indian IPR
