Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: copyright act 1957 section 58 · Page 1 of about 300 results (0.044 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Mar 03 2008

Lahari Recording Company Limited Rep. by Its Managing Director Vs. Mus ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-03-2008

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Imperial Copyright Act - Sections 2, 2(1), 2(2) and 13; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 14, 51, 55 and 58; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 1, Rule 3 - Order 2, Rule 3

Reported in : 2008(3)CTC385; LC2008(2)341; 2008(37)PTC121(Mad)

be infringing the copyright work as per Section 51 read with Section 14(a) and Section 14(b) of the Copyright Act, 1957. No doubt innocence is no defence to a charge of infringement of copyright and the offence is completed … available to the owner of a copyright, 1.as per Section 55 for an infringement and the other under Section 58 for conversion. Only if an infringement is established, damages can be presumed. General damages does not require specific

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 02 2001

Smithkline Beecham Consumer Healthcare Gmbhy and ors. Vs. Hindustan Le ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-02-2001

Subject : Civil

Acts : 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

Reported in : (2002)ILLJ453Bom

of them are infringing copies of one or more of the plaintiffs copyright works aforesaid. By virtue of Section 58 of the Copyright Act 1957, plaintiffs Nos. 1 and/or 3 have at all material times been the owners … 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 & Ask

Oct 24 2008

Pfizer Enterprises Sarl Vs. Cipla Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-24-2008

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsCivil

Acts : Trade Marks Act, 1999 - Sections 2(1), 134, 134(1) and 134(2); Evidence Act - Sections 58; Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 62(2); Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) , 1908 - Sections 20 - Order 2 - Order 6, Rules 2 and 4 - Order 7, Rules 1, 10, 11 and 14 - Order 8, Rules 2 and 3 to 5 - Order 10, Rules 1 and 2 - Order 14, Rule 2 - Order 39; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) (Amendment) Act, 2002

Reported in : 2009(39)PTC358(Del)

conundrum before us.12. The Preliminary Question which arose in Dhodha House was whether the existence of jurisdiction under Copyright Act, 1957 would also enable the clubbing of the dispute arising from the Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958. The Supreme … Iccharam : [1974]2SCR544 a Coordinate Bench had observed that - 'admissions in pleadings or judicial admissions admissible under Section 58 of the Evidence Act made by the parties or their agents at or before the hearing of the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Dec 09 2016

The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of University of Oxford & O ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-09-2016

Subject : Education

opined that this conclusion was buttressed given that while the term ‗reproduce‘ had not been defined in the Copyright Act, 1957, Section 2(hh) which defines ‗duplicating equipment‘, Section 2(s) which defines ‗photograph‘ and Section 2(x) which defines ‗reprography‘, contemplate the … and Mr.Pravesh Thakur, Advocates for R-2 Mr.Anup Bhambani, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Jawahar Raja, RFA(OS) No.81/2016 Page 1 of 58 Mr.Gautam Bhatia and Mr.Chinmay Kanojia, Advocates for R-3 Mr.Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr.Advocate instructed by Ms.Swathi Sukumar, Ms.Anu Paracha,

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 18 2004

Nri Film Production Associates (P) Ltd. Vs. Twentieth Century Fox Film ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Aug-18-2004

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Copy Right Act, 1957 - Sections 2 and 55; Copy Right (Amendment) Act, 1957 - Sections 2

Reported in : ILR2004KAR4530

for a declaration that the Movie Independence Day (I.D.) produced by the defendants is the infringement of the copyright of the film script Extra Terrestrial Mission (E.T.M.). Further seek an injunction against display of the film in … a sequel to the observations of Hon'ble Pathak J, an amendment to Section 2 of the Copy right Act, 1957 is effected by incorporating Clause (V) w.e.f. 10.5.1995 which reads thus:(a) 'adoption' means, -(i) in relation to a … the following testing guidelines to determine the infringement in paras 46 and 58 as follows:'46. Thus, on a careful consideration and elucidation of the various

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 20 1980

Pillalamarri Lakshmikantham and ors. Vs. Ramakrishna Pictures and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-20-1980

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : Indian Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 55 and 58; Indian Copyright Act, 1914 - Sections 13; Indian Copyright Act, 1911; Press Act, 1661; Law Revision Act, 1863; Indian Copyright Act, 1775; Indian Copyright Act, 1814; United Kingdom Copyright Act, 1911; Andhra Pradesh Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1956

Reported in : AIR1981AP224

were held to have suffered no 'damages' however, for the piracy of the book under Sections 55 and 58 of the Copyright Act XIV of 1957, it was observed:'It is impossible to determine what precise part of … accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs in both. Intellectual Property Rights - damages - Section 55 of Copyright Act, 1957 - matter regarding infringement of theme of book by director and producer of movie - relief of damages

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 16 2006

Microsoft Corporation Vs. Deepak Raval

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Jun-16-2006

Subject : Intellectual Property Rights

Acts : 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

Reported in : LC2007(1)72

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 … the Act, hard disks, diskettes, packaging and advertising material, labels, stationery articles and all other infringing material under Section 58 of the Act;e) An order for damages be passed in favor of the Plaintiff and against the defendants;f)

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 26 2008

Espn Star Sports Vs. Global Broadcast News Ltd. and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-26-2008

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsMedia and Communication

Acts : Copyright Act, 1957 - Sections 2, 13, 14, 18, 19, 30, 37, 37(3), 39, 39A, 51, 52, 52B, 53, 55, 58, 61, 61(1), 61(2), 64, 65 and 66; Copyright (Amendment) Act, 1994; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Order 1, Rule 9; Constitution of India - Article 19(1)

Reported in : LC2008(3)257; 2008(38)PTC477(Del)

learned Single Judge had dismissed the entire suit of the appellant/plaintiff for non-compliance of Section 61 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. After the arguments were heard in this appeal, both the parties … reproduction rights. Emphasis have been placed upon Section 39-A which provides that Sections 18, 19, 30, 53, 55, 58, 64, 65 and 66 shall with any necessary adaptations and modifications apply in relation to the Broadcast reproduction

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 25 2013

R.Radha Krishnan Vs. Mr.A.R.Murugadoss

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-25-2013

Subject : Land Acquisition

telecast in Pothigai Channel, vide plaint document No.1, contended that the applicant/plaintiff is entitled to protection under the Copyright Act, 1957. Therefore, the interim injunction was sought for against the defendants from using the name Raja Rani in respect … is entitled to all the rights of the owner against persons possessing or dealing with infringing copies under Section 58 of the Copyright Act. Section 62 of the Copyright Act deals with jurisdiction of court with which we

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 31 2000

P.N. Krishna Murthy Vs. Cooperative for American Relief Everywhere

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Oct-31-2000

Subject : Media and CommunicationIntellectual Property Rights

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 2, Rule 2

Reported in : 2000VIIAD(Delhi)1009; AIR2001Delhi258; 88(2000)DLT506; 2001(2)RAJ87

the power and possession of the defendants and to restore the same to the plaintiff under Section 58, Copyright Act, 1957.7. In the application for ad-interim injunction filed by the plaintiff, learned Trial Court believing the statement contained in

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial