Advanced Search Results
Yonex Kabushiki Kaisha Vs. Phillips International and anr.
Delhi
Aug-20-2007
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13 and 40; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 27, 27(2), 28, 28(3), 30(1) and 31; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 39, Rules 1 and 2
LC2007(3)228; 2007(35)PTC345(Del)
the Universal Copyright Convention, the plaintiff's works are protected in India by virtue of Section 40 of the Copyright Act 1957, read in conjunction with the International Copyright Order 1999.5. It is further submitted that the plaintiff is also
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAdobe Systems, Inc. and anr. Vs. Mr. P. Bhoominathan and anr.
Delhi
Mar-05-2009
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2 and 40; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 9, Rules 7 and 13
LC2009(2)277; 2009(39)PTC658(Del)
work as per Section 2(o) of the Copyright Act, 1957. The Plaintiffs' works are protected in India under Section 40 of the Copyright Act, 1957 read with the International Copyright Order, 1999 as the rights of authors of … as developed and marked by the Plaintiffs are 'computer programme' within the meaning of Section 2(ffc) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and also included in the definition of a literary work as per Section 2(o) of the Copyright Act,
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMicroforms Inc Vs. Girdhar and Co. and ors.
Delhi
Jan-13-2006
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13(1), 14, 15, 15(2), 40, 48 and 51; ;Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2 and 2(5); Designs Act, 1911; ;Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2 and 2(1); ;Patents Act; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 479; ;Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 15
128(2006)DLT238; 2006(32)PTC157(Del)
however, claimed that whether such a copyright is registered or not, in view of the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Copyright Act) the copyright in the artistic works subsists and gives an exclusive … The plaintiff also claims that it enjoys copyright protection in India as a consequence of the provisions of Section 40 of the Copyright Act and the Berne Convention, Universal Copyright Convention read with Indian International Copyright Order, 1999.6.
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
Smithkline Beecham Consumer Healthcare Gmbhy and ors. Vs. Hindustan Le ...
Mumbai
Aug-02-2001
Civil
Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 9, 11 and 151 - Order 2, Rules 1, 2 and 3; Companies Act, 1956; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 40, 58 and 62; Designs Act; International Copyright Order, 1958
(2002)ILLJ453Bom
their aforesaid contracts of service. Copyright also subsists therein in Belgium. By virtue of Section 40 of the Copyright Act 1957, the said works also attract copyright protection in India, Belgium being a country specified in both the Schedule
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMicrofibres Inc. Vs. Girdhar and Co. and anr.
Delhi
May-28-2009
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 6, 11, 13, 13(2), 14, 15, 15(1), 15(2), 16, 22, 40, 63, 67; Copyright Act, 1967 - Sections 15; Designs Act, 2000 - Sections 2, 4, 11(2), 12 and 19(1); Design Act of 1911 - Sections 2(5); Patent and Designs Act; Patent Act; Trade Marks Act; U.K. Designs Act, 1949 - Sections 1(3); Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 2(1); Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 120B, 415, 420 and 479; New Design Rules, 2001; Copyright Law
LC2009(2)229; 2009(40)PTC519(Del)
Matched in: Citation LC2009(2)229; 2009(40)PTC519(Del)
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMicrosoft Corporation Vs. Ms. K. Mayuri and ors.
Delhi
Apr-30-2007
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1959 - Sections 2, 7, 13(1), 14, 17, 40, 51 and 201; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 13(1), 14, 40, 55 and 116(4); Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988 - Sections 96 and 97; Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 135
LC2007(3)27; 2007(35)PTC415(Del)
and marketed by the Plaintiff is a 'computer programme' within the meaning of Section 2 (ffc) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and included in the definition of a literary work as per Section 2(o) of the Act.6. I affirm … from and are first published in the said member countries. Plaintiff's works are, thus, protected in India under Section 40 of the Act read with the International Copyright Order, 1999. The case of the plaintiff is that the
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMicrosoft Corporation Vs. Mr. Kiran and anr.
Delhi
Sep-07-2007
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 7, 13(1), 14, 17, 40, 51(1), 115(4) and 201; Lanham Act; International Copyright Order, 1999
LC2007(3)214; 2007(35)PTC748(Del)
from and are first published in the said member countries. Plaintiff's works are, thus, protected in India under Section 40 of the Copyright Act, 1957 read with the International Copyright Order, 1999. The case of the plaintiff is … software developed and marketed by the plaintiff is 'computer programme' within the meaning of Section 2(ffc) of the Copyright Act, 1957 (herein after referred to as the said Act) and included in the definition of a literary work as
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskSaranya Zaveri and anr. Vs. Kamadon Academy P. Ltd.
Kerala
Mar-01-2006
Company
Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 134, 134(1) and 134(2); Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13, 40, 55, 62, 62(1) and 62(2); Kerala Stamp Act - Sections 33; Corporations Act, 2001 - Sections 45A, 114, and 127(1); Evidence Act - Sections 85; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 15 to 20, 21, 26, 43, 115 and 151 - Order 3, Rule 1 - Order 7, Rule 1, 8, 10, 11 - Order 8, Rule 3 - Order 43, Rule 1; Constitution of India - Article 227
[2006]133CompCas546(Ker); 2008(38)PTC554(Ker)
is one of the countries covered by the International Copyright Order so as to bring the case under Section 40 of the Copyright Act, 1957. It was imperative for the plaintiff to plead the jurisdictional facts so as … 1, Civil Procedure Code and Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957, is for a declaration that the plaintiff is the exclusive owner and proprietor of the marks Kamadon and
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMicrosoft Corporation Vs. Deepak Raval
Delhi
Jun-16-2006
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1959 - Sections 2; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 7, 13(1), 14, 17, 40, 51, 51(1), 58, 116(4) and 201; International Copyright Order, 1999
LC2007(1)72
from and are first published in the said member countries. Plaintiff's works are, thus, protected in India under Section 40 of the Copyright Act, 1957 read with the International Copyright Order, 1999. The case of the plaintiff is … User Instructions and Manuals, are 'original literary works' as contemplated under Section 2(o) and Section 13(1)(a) of the Copyright Act, 1957. The plaintiff is the owner of the said copyright. A complete list of the software programme owned by
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskMicrosoft Corporation Vs. Mr. I. Sadiq Batcha and ors.
Delhi
Jul-01-2009
Intellectual Property Rights
Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13(1), 14, 17, 20(1), 40 and 51; Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958; Trade Marks Act, 1999; Delhi High Court Act - Sections 5(2); Delhi High Court (Amendment) Act; International Copyright Order, 1991
2009(40)PTC477(Del)
Matched in: Citation 2009(40)PTC477(Del)
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »