Can a film be protected from piracy before its release? Delhi HC on “Drishyam: The Conclusion”
The Court held that nature of the injury, which the plaintiff may likely to suffer, might not be remedied in terms of money.
The Court held that nature of the injury, which the plaintiff may likely to suffer, might not be remedied in terms of money.
In a copyright infringement case involving alleged unauthorised use of source codes, the Bombay High Court quashed proceedings against an employee, finding no material to show his active role beyond carrying out duties assigned by his employer. The Court also held that a company cannot maintain a criminal complaint through its Vice-President or an individual Director unless duly authorised by a Board resolution.
This is India’s first judicial ruling to consider the application of copyright law and the fair dealing exception under the Copyright Act 1957, in context of the training and operation of artificial intelligence systems, including large language models (LLMs).
The complaint concerns Google’s alleged use of copyrighted books, journal articles and other literary works in developing and training its Gemini AI models. The plaintiffs contend that content made available through limited-use programmes and other sources was unlawfully repurposed for AI development.
The Bombay High Court declined interim relief in a copyright infringement and passing-off action concerning rival logo device marks, holding that resemblance between logos is not by itself actionable unless supported by evidence demonstrating copying or reasonable opportunity of access to the claimant’s work.
Delhi High Court refused interim injunction against the OTT release of Dhurandhar: The Revenge in a copyright dispute over the remixed “Tirchi Topiwale” song from Tridev, holding that suppression of material facts and prolonged inaction disentitled the plaintiff from equitable relief.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories of April 2026 on Intellectual Property Rights from all High Courts; covering key updates on Personality Rights, Trade mark and Copyright infringement.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories of March 2026 on Intellectual Property Rights from all High Courts; covering key updates on Domain name fraud, Trade mark and Copyright infringement.
A sequel to award-winning film “Kahaani”, Sujoy Ghosh’s “Kahaani 2” was embroiled in controversy when in 2016, it was alleged that the film had infringed copyright of the complainant’s script titled “Sabak”.
In the present case, Jubilant Generics alleged Jamp Pharma Canada of misusing its confidential pharmaceutical dossiers. Jubilant claims these were wrongly shared with Indian companies, leading to copyright and trade secret violations.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories of February 2026 on Intellectual Property Rights from all High Courts; covering key updates on Personality Rights, Trade mark and Copyright infringement.
“Defendants have copied the trade dresses of the plaintiff in entirety, in which plaintiff has a copyright and the intent behind copying is to trade over the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff, which it has built over the years and to misrepresent to the public that their goods have some association with the plaintiff.”
“A comparison of the original artistic works of the plaintiff posted on Instagram with that of the infringing works of Defendants1 and 2 posted on Instagram clearly depicts, prima facie, infringement of the copyrights of the plaintiff.”
Delay in blocking access to rogue platforms would result in irreparable breach of JioStar India’s exclusive broadcast rights and revenue loss.
“The ad hoc arrangement was directed purely as an interim arrangement so that Defendant 1 can continue to use the sound recordings of the plaintiff’s repertoire and, at the same time, the plaintiff is protected by way of deposit of ad hoc license fees, out of which certain amount was permitted to be withdrawn by the plaintiff”
“The need for immediate relief is particularly pressing in this case as the infringing websites are making available the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works, which could lead to significant financial losses for the plaintiffs.”
“The franchise agreement prima facie indicated acceptance of ownership of the plaintiff in the registered trademarks and permitted use only during subsistence of the agreement.”
“Though the balance of convenience is not in favour of the plaintiff, if the movie is released, the plaintiff would be in a position to claim damages.”
“Ilaiyaraaj’s identity, name, image, and work are being exploited deliberately disregarding the celebrity’s personality rights, on digital platforms, to gain traction and generate revenue without authorisation.”
“Once copyright infringement is the core relief, incidental or ancillary reliefs, whether based on confidentiality, trade secrets, or passing off, do not affect maintainability of the suit as a whole.”