Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (10) TMI 716

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... plaintiff No.1, having its office at Eros Corporate Towers, 5th Floor, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 and is an entity incorporated and registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. Plaintiff No.2 was set up in the year 1989 to provide marketing, promotion, anti-piracy awareness campaigns and actions and channel development support to plaintiff No.1 and/or its affiliates. Additionally, the products of plaintiff No.1 are distributed in New Delhi through various authorized distributors. 3. The case of the plaintiffs is that plaintiff No.1 was set up in the year 1975 and is the biggest software publisher for personal and business computing in the world. It engages in the development, manufacture, licensing, and support of a range of softw .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... re created by authors or member countries and originate from and are first published in the said member countries. This is by virtue of section 40 of the Copyright Act, 1957 read with the International Copyright Order, 1999. 7. The plaintiff No.1 being the owner of the copyright in the aforesaid literary works within the meaning of the proviso to Section 17 of the Copyright Act, 1957 is entitled to all the exclusive rights flowing from such ownership as set out in Section 14 of the said Act. 8. The reproduction in any material form, including publication, performance, dissemination, translation, adaptation, the use, distribution, sale, offer for sale of any of the above material without the plaintiffs consent, would amount to infring .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... located at 19, Ground Floor, Shanthi Road, Shanthi Nagar, Bangalore is a business entity engaged in marketing and selling of computer hardware including branded computers and peripherals. Defendants No.2 3 appear to be the partners of the said defendant No.1-firm. 12. The plaintiffs case against the defendants is that in the month of April, 2008, the plaintiffs received information that the defendants were infringing the plaintiffs copyrights and other intellectual property rights by carrying on the business of unauthorized Hard Disk Loading of the plaintiffs software programmes on to the branded computers sold by them to their customers. The said unlicensed software, naturally, were not accompanied by any original media, such as Or .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Dhomne, Technical Expert conducted a detailed examination of the laptop and the CDs seized by me. The technical examination of the said laptop computer system revealed that it was loaded with Microsoft Windows XP Professional 2002 software, and Microsoft Office 2003 had been partially loaded onto the hard drive of the said laptop computer system. The technical expert then noted down the serial number of the laptop system as seized by me and inspected by him and also noted down the product IDs of the software programmes as found to be loaded on the said laptop computer system. The said Audit sheet was then signed by the technical expert who had prepared the same and the same was then handed over to me. I then counter-signed the audit sheet. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the plaintiffs and have also gone through the affidavit in ex parte evidence as well as the documents placed on the record. In their evidence, the plaintiffs have, in fact, proved the facts stated in the plaint and have also exhibited the relevant documents in support of their case. The evidence filed by the plaintiffs has gone unrebutted as no cross-examination of the plaintiffs witness was carried out. Therefore, the statement made by the plaintiffs is accepted as correct deposition. Under these facts and circumstances, the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree for permanent injunction. Hence, the suit of the plaintiffs is decreed in terms of paragraph-38(a) (b) of the plaint. As far as the relief of damages and rendition of account .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates