x

June 2018

IPR Amicus: March 2018

by Aditya Kaushik

No copyright in the title of a cinematographic film

The Division Bench of Madras High Court has reversed the findings of the Single Judge and set aside the interim injunction order after holding that there cannot be any copyright in the title of the cinematograph film or any other copyrightable subject matter. It was held that under Sections 13 and 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957 there is no copyright in the title, and it is the entire work which is protected by copyright. The judgement highlights that no amount of hard work put in a copyrightable subject matter can create a copyright in something in which copyright never vested under law. According to the author, even though some title registration documents suggest that it grants exclusive use or facilitates ‘mutual arrangements’ between the film fraternity, the same has no effect in the Court of Law..

 

Ratio decidendi

  • Patents - Counter claim in infringement suit better than revocation in IPAB – Delhi High Court
  • Patent infringement – Prior study having contrary findings is not ‘prior art’ – Delhi High Court
  • Trademark infringement – Identical manner of use important, while difference in packing not material – Delhi High Court
  • Trademarks – Prior use, similarity and likelihood of confusion – Delhi High Court notes that marks TRI VOLIB and TRI-VOBIT 2 are phonetically and structurally similar with likelihood of confusion as drugs are for the same ailment
  • Copyrights - Interim relief must not be interpreted by violating the Act – Delhi High Court

 

News Nuggets

  • Copyright in photograph - Work must be ‘substantially similar’ – US CoA holds that there is no copyright in pose
  • Delhi High Court grants permanent injunction against infringement of mark ‘INDIA TODAY’
  • UK High Court upholds patent and design infringement claim for Magnitone products

 

March, 2018/Issue-80 March, 2018/Issue-80

Browse articles