University Institute of Legal Studies,

Punjab University, Chandigarh

Intellectual Property Right Project

Topic:- Remedies for Infringement of Copyright

Submitted to:- Submitted by:- Gunjan

Dr. Kritika Class:- B.Com.LLB(HONS.)
Roll No.:- 250/19
Semester:- 10th
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Primarily, I would thank God for being able to complete this project with success. Then I would like
to thank my subject teacher of Intellectual Property Law - Ms Kritika , whose valuable guidance
has been the ones that helped me patch this project and make it a full proof success, her
suggestions and instructions has served as the major contribution towards completion of the
project.

Then I would like to thank my parents and friends who have helped me with their valuable
suggestions and guidance has been helpful in various phases of the completion of the project.

Last but not the least I would thank myself who completed this project on time and with full efforts.

Gunjan
TABLE OF INDEX
 INTRODUCTION
THE COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957: The Copyright Act 1957 was the first post-independence copyright
legislation in India and the law has been amended 6 times since 1957. The most recent
amendment was in the year 2012, through the Copyright (Amendment) Act 2012. Copyright is a
bundle of rights given by the law to the creators of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works
and the producers of cinematography films and sound recordings.

Copyright laws provide certain exclusive rights to the copyright holder, such as the right to
reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works. Use of
such copyright protected work without the permission of the copyright owner is copyright
infringement. In this project, we look at copyright infringement in India.

Copyright is an asset celebrated by Copyright Certificate holders; this intellectual property

protection right protects original work of authorship including software, books, articles,
photographs and other creative works. As the copyright is a legal evidence and public notice of
ownership, if this intellectual property is infringed, the remedies for copyright infringement will be
covered briefly.

Copyright infringement has become a serious issue in the modern world. Infringement occurs
when a person intentionally or unintentionally copies the work of another creator. Infringement is
usually classified into two categories - primary infringement and secondary infringement.
 RIGHTS OF COPYRIGHTS OWNERS

It is important to first understand the rights held by a copyright owner before tackling the remedies
for infringement. Authorized copyright owners have the right to:
a) Publish the work
b) Perform the work in public
c) Produce the work in a material form
d) Produce, reproduce, perform or publish any translation of the work
e) Make any adaptation of the work
f) Communicate the work through broadcast, radio or cable

The original creator of the work enjoys a few exclusive rights to:
a) Make copies of the work
b) Make a derivative based on the original
c) Distribute the work
d) Perform the work publicly
e) Display the work in a commercial setting
f) Seek remedies for unauthorized use of the copyright work1

1
https://blog.ipleaders.in/remedies-available-copyright-infringement-india/
 COMMON TYPES OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

The following are some of the most common types of copyright infringement:
 Making copies of copyrighted works for sale or hire or letting them for hire.
 Permitting performance of copyright infringed works at any place for performance of works.
 Distributing copyright infringing works.
 Public exhibition of copyright infringing works.
 Importing copyright infringing works into India.2

If any of the activity is performed by a person or business, then they are liable for prosecution
under copyright laws in India.For claiming the ownership of a copyright in the case of a literary,
dramatic, musical or artistic work, the name of the author or the publisher which appears on copies
of the work is presumed to be the author of the work, unless the contrary is proved.

Copyright owners can take legal action against any person or entity that infringes on the copyright
of a work. The copyright owner can file a civil remedies case in a court having jurisdiction and is
entitled to remedies by way of injunctions, damages and accounts. Further, no court inferior to that
of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first class can try any offence under the
Copyright Act.

In case of copyright infringement by an artificial judical person like a private limited

company or limited liability partnership (LLP), the company and all persons who at the time the
offence was committed was in charge or was responsible to the company for the conduct of the
business of the company, would be liable to be proceeded against.

2
https://www.indiafilings.com/learn/copyright-infringement-in-india/
 REMEDIES AVAILABLE FOR INFRINGEMENT UNDER COPYRIGHT ACT

The existence of a right is meaningless unless an effective remedy is provided for redressing its
violation. In case of infringement in India, a copyright owner is entitled to certain remedies under
the Copyright Act, 1957. There are three types of remedies available for infringement under the
Act:

1) Civil remedies

2) Administrative remedies, and

3) Criminal remedies

I. CIVIL REMEDIES:

The more common remedies availed by authors in case of Copyright Infringement

are mostly civil in nature. Civil remedies are available to an aggrieved author of a
copyright under Section 55 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The various civil remedies
are:

1. ) Interlocutory Injunctions: One of the most important remedies for copyright

infringement, in most cases, the relief is granted by injunction. An injunction may
either be interlocutory, one which is granted prior to the trial and only until after the
trial or further order, or it may be final and permanent. Applications for interlocutory
injunctions are frequently made in actions for infringement of copyright since
damages are rarely an adequate remedy for the injury suffered by the plaintiff. The
objective of an interlocutory injunction is to provide the plaintiff immediate and
temporary protection against any continuous violation of his rights for which he
cannot be adequately be compensated in terms of damages.

After the English case American Cyanamid v. Ethicon Ltd3, three prerequisites to
grant a interlocutory injunction were laid down –

1. Firstly, there needs to be a prima facie case.

2. Secondly, there needs to be a balance of convenience.

3
[1975] UKHL 1
 3. Thirdly, there needs to be an irreparable injury.

In the Gujarat Bottling Co Ltd. V. Coca Cola Company and Ors 4, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court, inter alia, observed that “The object of the interlocutory injunction is to protect the plaintiff
against injury by violation of his right for which he could not be adequately compensated n
damages recoverable in the action if the uncertainty were resolvd in his favour at the trail. The
need for such protection has, however, to be weighed against the corresponding need of the
defendant to be protected against injury resulting from his having been prevented from exercising
his own legal rights for which he could not be adequately compensated. The court must weigh one
need against another and determine where the “balance of convenience lies.”

1.1.) Mareva Injunction: It is an order in the form of an injunction which restrains defendant by
freezing his assets temporarily, thus preventing the defendant from removing his assets outside
the jurisdiction while pending hearing. This is so that the Plaintiff can obtain the redressal from the
decree or award that may be passed in the action or in reference. This form of injunction is quite
recent, dating back to the 1975’s and is derived from the case Mareva Compania Naviera SA v.
International Bulk Carriers SA.
Further, this type of injunction is provided under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure
Code, 1908. The Court may also order the Defendant to place part or whole of the infringed
property under the Court’s disposal if the Court deems that the Defendant is trying to hinder or
obstruct the execution of the Decree.

2. ) Permanent Injunction: Once the case of prima facie infringement of copyright is established-
the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of permanent injunction. It is usually granted in those cases
where granting monetary damages alone can not be treated as adequate relief. And once
permanent injunction is granted,it runs for entire course of term of copyright. Defendant is
permanently restrained from the commission of an act that would defeat Plaintiff’s interest. Once a
permanent injunction is granted, it runs for the entire course of copyright term. Attaining a
permanent injunction does not require proof of actual damage, as mere proof of copyright
infringement is acceptable.5
In Maganlal Savani v. Rupam Pictures (Pvt.) Ltd. 6 the defendant, was the producer of the film
“Chupke Chupke”. But Defendant assigned the exclusive and personal ownership of the said film
in favour of Plaintiff by an agreement. Under this agreement, plaintiff was exclusively entitled to
exploit, exhibit, or broadcast the said film, including exhibition over television, satellite, or cable
television. The Bombay High Court held that a satelite telecast of the said film by a person other

4
1995 (5) SCC 545
5
Dr. Supreet,2024, Intellecyual Prperty Right, Single Law Agency.
6
AIR 2000 Bom. 416
than the plaintiff would violate the terms of the agreement. The injunction restraining other parties
from exhibiting the said film was granted under Section 55 of the Act.

3. ) Anton Pillar Orders:- Only made in the most extreme of circumstances, this type of order is
drastic and its effects are far reaching. Deriving its name from the Court of Appeals decision;
Anton Piller AG v. Manufacturing Processes it has the following elements:-

1. It can be an injunction which restrains the defendant from engaging with the infringed
work or destroying them.
2. It can be an order that permits the plaintiff’s solicitors to enter the premises of the
defendants, to search the same and take any of the infringed goods into their safe
custody.
3. It can also be an order which directs the defendant to disclose the names and addresses
of any suppliers and/or customers who the defendant may have done any business with
using the infringed good and is directed to also file an affidavit

This form of order has, in various copyright and passing off matters, has extended to the
aggrieved author the desired effect. This is because the defendant has no knowledge about the
proceedings initiated against him until he is required by the order of the court to admit the Plaintiff
and his representatives into his premises.
Three conditions have to be satisfied before the court will even consider making an order:-

1. The Plaintiff must show that he has a strong prima facie case.
2. The Plaintiff must show that he has suffered or is likely to suffer grave and irreparable loss if an
order is not made in his favour.
3. The Plaintiff must have clear evidence against the Defendant and must show the incriminating
infringed goods in the Defendants possession and there is a real possibility that if an order is not
passed against the Defendant, the goods may be destroyed by the Defendant before any
application can be made on notice7.
3.1. ) John Doe/ Ashok Kumar Orders/ Rolling Anton Pillar Orders:- An Anton Piller order is an
extraordinary equitable remedy that permits the representatives of a plaintiff to request entrance
into a defendant’s premises to search for and seize relevant documents and other materials that
the defendant is likely to destroy. If the defendant refuses to allow entry, he or she may be held in
contempt. Because these orders are almost always sought without notice to the defendant, a
plaintiff is required to make “full and frank disclosure” to the court, including the weaknesses in the
plaintiff’s case. The order will generally stipulate that the parties are to return to the Court after
execution of the order so that the defendant may challenge the basis on which the order was
7
https://blog.ipleaders.in/civil-remedies-copyright-infringement/
granted or the manner in which it was executed. Anton Piller orders granted against unidentified
(or “John Doe”) defendants are often referred to as “rolling” Anton Piller orders.