Entertainment — India Copyright Cases
95 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 4 · 95 total
The Football Association Premier League Limited v.Yoghurt Tv & Ors.
The Football Association Premier League Limited filed a suit seeking permanent injunction for the infringement of its copyrighted content by various 'Rogue Apps' like Yoghurt TV. The court initially granted procedural exemptions sought by the plaintiff regarding pre-litigation mediation and advance service upon regulatory bodies (DoT/MEITY). Crucially, the court also passed a significant temporary injunction order, granting a 'Dynamic+' relief to protect its works against ongoing infringement across various platforms.
M/S. Panchajanya Features v.Bommareddy Ashok Reddy
This Civil Revision Petition challenged the Trial Court's refusal to transfer a copyright dispute concerning the Telugu movie "Vinnapalu Vinavale Vintha Vinthalu" to the specialized Commercial Court. The petitioners argued that since the matter involved intellectual property rights and exceeded the specified pecuniary threshold, it inherently fell under the purview of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The High Court agreed with this interpretation, setting aside the Trial Court's order and allowing the petition for rejection of the suit.
Star India Pvt. Ltd. v.Ashar Nisar & Ors.
Star India Pvt. Ltd., an entertainment media company, filed a suit against various individuals and entities for the unauthorized dissemination and broadcasting of its copyrighted content through rogue mobile applications and illicit websites. The plaintiffs asserted their exclusive rights over content streamed via STAR Channels and Disney+ Hotstar. Given that the defendants failed to contest the suit by filing a written statement despite being served, the Delhi High Court found them liable for copyright piracy.
Los Gatos Production Services India LLP v.Wunderbar Films Private Limited
The dispute concerns alleged copyright infringement related to 'behind the scenes (BTS)' footage from the film "NAANUM ROWDY DHAAN". The fifth defendant challenged the jurisdiction and maintainability of the suit filed by Los Gatos Production Services India LLP, arguing lack of territorial nexus and non-compliance with pre-suit mediation. The Court held that since part of the cause of action arose in Chennai, it retained territorial jurisdiction, thus dismissing the challenges.
Los Gatos Production Services India LLP v.Wunderbar Films Private Limited
The dispute involved applications seeking rejection of plaint and revocation of leave to sue in a copyright infringement matter. The fifth defendant argued lack of territorial jurisdiction and non-compliance with pre-suit mediation. The Court held that since part of the cause of action arose within Chennai, it retained jurisdiction, thus dismissing both applications.
Fincraft Media And Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. v.Mahesh Vaman Manjrekar & Ors.
Fincraft Media and Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. filed a Leave Petition seeking permission from the Bombay High Court to file a suit concerning copyright infringement related to the film 'Natyasamrat-Asa Nat hone Nahin.' The petitioner argued that while most transactions occurred in Mumbai, some agreements were executed in Hyderabad, potentially challenging the court's territorial jurisdiction.
Sree Devi Video Corporation v.M/s.Sri Murugan Pictures
The plaintiff sued the defendants seeking a declaration that it was the absolute owner of limited video, cable TV, and internet copyrights in certain films, acquired from M/s.Sri Murugan Pictures under an agreement dated 02.12.2000. The suit also sought permanent injunction against infringement by the defendants. The court found that the plaintiff successfully established its case through documentary evidence.
Saregama India Limited v.Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited
Saregama India Limited filed a declaratory suit under Section 60 of the Copyright Act, seeking protection against threats made by Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited regarding copyright infringement. The core dispute involved Saregama claiming ownership over numerous sound recordings and literary works. However, when Zee subsequently initiated its own suit for copyright infringement against Saregama, the Delhi High Court held that this action brought the matter within the scope of the proviso to Section 60. Consequently, the initial declaratory suit filed by Saregama was rendered infructuous.
Bhimavaram Community Network Bcn v.M/S Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd.
The petitioner challenged the dismissal of its application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC in a commercial suit filed by the respondent. The core dispute involved allegations that the petitioner was infringing the respondent's copyright by removing/overshadowing the 'T-Series' Logo while broadcasting content. The court ultimately dismissed the petition, finding no patent perversity in the Trial Court's decision.
M.Viyan Aarman v.Etecetra Entertainment
M.Viyan Aarman filed a suit for copyright infringement concerning the title of the film 'Saamaniyan'. The appeal challenged an order rejecting the application for injunction, arguing that the appellant had registered the title and faced breach of trust by the first respondent. However, the court found that the appellant was only alleging infringement qua title, which is not maintainable under existing legal precedents.
M/S Thind Motion Films Private Limited v.Ishdeep Randhawa and others
The petitioner challenged an ex-parte ad-interim injunction passed by a Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, restraining defendants from releasing the film 'Jodi Teri Meri.' The High Court observed that the suit was fundamentally flawed due to jurisdictional error, as claims based on the Copyright Act should have been filed in the District Court. Consequently, the court declined to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 227.
M/s. Symphony Recording Co. v.Dr.K.Shobana
The appellant (M/s. Symphony Recording Co.) appealed an order that granted interim injunctions to the respondent (Dr. K. Shobana), alleging infringement of her copyright in sound recordings ('Kanda Sashti Kavacham' and 'Twinkle Twinkle Little Star'). The core dispute revolved around whether agreements signed by Dr. Shobana while she was a minor were valid, and the rights of the performer under the Copyright Act.
Sri.A.J.Shashank S/O A.N.Jagadish v.Aiplex Software Private Limited
The plaintiff, who runs a YouTube channel uploading film clips from 'Encounter Dayanayak', sued Aiplex Software and others seeking mandatory injunction to withdraw copyright strikes and damages. The defendants argued that they were acting as an authorized antipiracy service provider for M/s Kasturi Media, which held the absolute rights over the movie.
Entertainment Network (India) Limited v.Https//Tuneincom/Podcasts/Arts--Culture- Podcasts/Bangla-Sunday-Suspense-P2082186/ and Ors
In this copyright infringement case, Entertainment Network (India) Limited sought to protect its audio content, 'Sunday Suspense,' which is based on literary works. The court issued an ex-parte order directing intermediary platforms (like Tuneincom) to immediately take down the infringing URLs and compelling Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to disclose server details used by the infringers. This ruling highlights the proactive role of courts in enforcing IP rights against digital infringement.
Hombale Films Llp v.Thaikkudam Bridge
Hombale Films LLP, the producer of the film 'Kantara', challenged an order passed by the District Court, Kozhikode. The original suit was filed by Thaikkudam Bridge (a musical band) claiming authorship and copyright over the song 'Navarasam'. The lower court had previously restrained respondents from using the music without permission.
Smt Supriya Shrinate v.M/S Mrt Music Ors.
This Commercial Appeal challenged an ex-parte order passed by the trial court, which directed the removal of links and blocking of social media handles belonging to political parties and associated entities. The plaintiff, M/S MRT Music, alleged copyright infringement when videos from a national political party's yatra used music similar to their film soundtrack (KGF Chapter-2). The Karnataka High Court partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the restrictive injunction orders but mandating that all involved parties remove the offending content from social media platforms. The matter was then remitted back to the trial court for fresh consideration.
M/s.Five Star Films Pvt. Ltd. v.Karthik Subbaraj.G
M/s.Five Star Films Pvt. Ltd filed a suit seeking declaration of ownership over the copyrights of its film 'Jigardhanda', damages, and permanent injunction against Karthik Subbaraj.G for alleged infringement. The parties subsequently executed a Joint Compromise Memo.
Crazy Concepts And Mazes Pvt. Ltd. v.N. Venkta Yayadri Rao
The Gujarat High Court allowed the appeal filed by Crazy Concepts And Mazes Pvt. Ltd., overturning a lower court's rejection of an interim injunction application. The plaintiffs, owners of the 'SCARY HOUSE' trademark and copyright in their dramatic work, successfully argued that the defendant was illegally adapting and reproducing their copyrighted material under a new name ('TERRIFIC DEVIL ZONE'). The Court emphasized that since the defendants failed to deny the allegations of adaptation during pleadings, the injunction should be granted to protect the plaintiffs' reputation and goodwill.
Hulm Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. v.Fantasy Sports Myfab11 Pvt. Ltd.
The Plaintiffs, developers of the Fantasy Sports Mobile Application 'EXCHANGE22', filed a suit alleging that the Defendants operate a competing application named MYFAB11 which infringes upon their copyrighted works. The court granted an interim injunction restraining the Defendants from using or making available the infringing content and directed them to suspend domain name registration and remove the app.
Deepak Singh v.Bunty Raghav (Producer) and others
Deepak Singh filed a petition seeking interim relief against producers (Respondents) who were making a film based on his book, 'Janhit Mein Jaari'. The core dispute revolved around copyright infringement. While the High Court noted that the civil suit was pending before the Trial Court and emphasized the need for evidence regarding similarity between the book and the film, it ultimately directed the parties to proceed with the trial court's application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of C.P.C., ensuring the existing interim relief continued until a final decision.
M/s.24 Am Studious Private Limited v.Divya M.Jain
The plaintiff filed a suit seeking perpetual injunction against defendants for releasing the film 'Production No.5 (Colour) – Ayalan' without consent, alleging infringement of Tamil Satellite Television Rights in India. The dispute centered on the validity of the finance agreement where the plaintiff pledged the exclusive copyright to the first defendant.
C.Prakash v.S.N. Media
C.Prakash appealed an order that vacated an initial injunction granted in his favour against S.N. Media. The dispute centered on whether C.Prakash's assignment of digital dubbing rights for films 'Chingari' and 'Shrikanta' was invalid because the first defendant claimed non-payment of consideration. The court held that copyright assignment does not require payment of consideration to be valid.
Uday Prakash v.Anand Pandit And Another
Uday Prakash appealed against the rejection of his application for a temporary injunction in a suit claiming infringement of his registered copyright ('Highway-39') by defendants who were producing a feature film titled 'Chehre'. The High Court found prima facie that there was no distinctive plagiarism, but directed the trial to be expedited and mandated an acknowledgment if the plaintiff succeeds.
Goldmines Telefilms Pvt Ltd v.Achla Sabharwal
The dispute concerns the ownership of the copyright in the 1987 Hindi film 'Sheela' between Goldmines Telefilms Pvt Ltd and Achla Sabharwal. Both parties claim to be the true assignee of the rights from the original producer, Dwarakish. Goldmines sought an interim injunction preventing Sabharwal from exploiting or claiming ownership of the copyright.
Sony Music Entertainment India Pvt. Ltd v.S.Khaja Mohideen
The appeals arose out of common final interlocutory orders concerning two actions for copyright infringement. The first suit involved musical works in 17 films, while the second concerned music from the film 'Citizen'. The court addressed issues related to prima facie case and balance of convenience before granting interim relief.
R.Ravindran v.M.Anandan
R.Ravindran appealed against an order concerning his rights as assignee of the copyright in a story related to the film 'Chakra'. The court dismissed both appeals, noting that while the primary finding regarding his arbitration application was accepted, the dismissal did not preclude him from asserting other legal causes of action.
Inkpot Films Private Limited v.Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited
Inkpot Films Private Limited filed a civil suit seeking permanent injunctions against various telecom and cable companies for infringing the copyright of its cinematographic film, "Is Love Enough? SIR". The plaintiff subsequently withdrew the entire suit and connected applications before the Madras High Court.
Sanjay Lalwani v.M/s.Jyostar Enterprises
Sanjay Lalwani filed an Original Application seeking an interim injunction against M/s. Jyostar Enterprises and others to prevent the alienation and telecasting of copyright and satellite rights for the film “PSV GARDA VEGA”. The applicant claimed that a subsequent assignment of these rights was in contravention of his original Deed of Assignment. However, the Madras High Court ultimately dismissed the application, holding that disputes concerning copyrights are generally considered non-arbitrable under established Supreme Court precedents.
K.P.Selvah @ Panner Selvam v.Atlee
K.P.Selvah filed a civil suit seeking permanent injunction against Atlee and M/s. AGS Entertainment Pvt., Ltd., claiming copyright infringement over his story 'Kalki', which was registered with the South Indian Film Writers' Association. After facing procedural hurdles in the trial court, Selvah sought permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh one. The Madras High Court intervened via revision petition, holding that the trial court erred by allowing withdrawal but denying the crucial liberty to institute a new suit on the same subject matter.
Mr.Mohammed Niyamathullah v.Mr.Mohammed Hidayathulla
This civil suit was filed by Mr. Mohammed Niyamathullah seeking a permanent injunction against defendants for infringing his copyright in the Tamil feature film, “Pongadee Neengalaum Unga Kadhalum.” The core of the dispute revolved around an Assignment Deed executed on 09.10.2013, where the plaintiff provided financial assistance to the defendant (who was venturing into film production) and subsequently acquired the entire copyright under default clauses. Despite the defendants' claims of forgery and lack of funds, the court found that the assignment deed was validly established through evidence, leading to a decree in favor of the plaintiff.
Copyright infringement or licensing dispute?
From digital piracy to content licensing, Arctic's copyright practice covers enforcement, licensing structuring, and fair-use defences.