Allowing an appeal in Krishika Lulla & Ors v Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta & Anr, the Supreme Court held that there is no copyright in the title of a literary work and a plaintiff can obtain relief only on the basis of an action for passing off or for infringement in respect of a registered trademark that comprises the title.
Lulla had appealed an order of Bombay High Court whereby the court had refused to quash a complaint and process issued under section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957, read with sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
Devkatta had claimed copyright in the title of a film, Desi Boys, which according to him was “the soul” of a story he had written that bore the same title. Alleging copyright violation in using the title, Devkatta had filed a complaint against five persons including Lulla, who was the producer of the film. The four against whom process was issued applied to Bombay High Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing of the complaint. The high court’s refusal to quash the complaint prompted Lulla to file an appeal to the Supreme Court.
Considering whether copyright can exist in a title, the Supreme Court held that a plain reading of section 13 of Copyright Act showed that an original literary work is one of the things that can be copyrighted. However, a title does not qualify as a work. It is incomplete in itself and refers to the work that follows.
Holding that prosecution based on allegations of infringement of copyright in a title is untenable, the Supreme Court quashed the criminal case pending against Lulla.
[/ihc-hide-content]
The dispute digest is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.
