Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Ownership and assignment of copyright for computer software in India was addressed by the Delhi High Court in a judgment [vague] on Pine Labs Private Limited vs Gemalto Terminals India Private Limited and others (FAO 635 of 2009 and FAO 636 of 2009).
Rameshwari Photocopy Services and Others, colloquially known as the DU Photocopy Case, was an Indian copyright law court case in the Delhi High Court filed by academic publishers Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press and Taylor & Francis, against Rameshwari Photocopy Services and the University of Delhi, the former being a shop ...
Note: if no court name is given, according to convention, the case is from the Supreme Court of the United States.Supreme Court rulings are binding precedent across the United States; Circuit Court rulings are binding within a certain portion of it (the circuit in question); District Court rulings are not binding precedent, but may still be referred to by other courts.
While many people tend to use the term fair use to denote copyright exceptions in India, it is a factually wrong usage. While the US and certain other countries follow the broad fair use exception, India follows a different approach towards copyright exceptions. [22] India follows a hybrid approach that allows :
This case involved the making of guides by the defendants of the text books published by the plaintiff. On the basis of the four factors mentioned in the US copyright statute and the decision in the instant case, the Indian Courts ruled in favor of the Defendants. The second case is of ICC Development (International) Ltd. v. New Delhi ...
Mannu Bhandari v. Kala Vikas Motion Pictures Ltd (AIR 1987 Delhi 13) is a landmark case in the area of Indian copyright law. It is the first decision from the Indian higher judiciary that clarified the scope and ambit of moral rights under the Indian copyright law.
The interim decision in the case, given by Justice Jaspal Singh, given in favour of the plaintiff, restricted the Indian Government from causing any further loss to the plaintiff by destroying the property. The interim ruling, given in 1992, established two central points about the ambit of moral rights within India.
This case has been cited and followed in many of the subsequent judgments from different courts in India. One of the most recent ones is Mansoob Haider v. Yashraj Films, [ 2 ] from the Bombay High Court where the Court had to decide whether the Bollywood movie Dhoom 3 was an infringement of the plaintiff's copyright in the script ONCE .