Software — India Copyright Cases
41 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 2 · 41 total
Bunch Microtechnologies Pvt Ltd v.Telegram Fz Llc & Anr.
In an amicable resolution, the Delhi High Court disposed of the copyright infringement suit filed by Bunch Microtechnologies against Telegram Fz Llc. The parties successfully negotiated and formalized a comprehensive Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) governing how complaints regarding content infringement must be handled. This SOP mandates specific proof requirements from complainants, such as demonstrating ownership of copyright or trademark, before Telegram takes action. The court upheld this agreement, binding the defendant to the terms while granting the plaintiff a partial refund of court fees.
Dassault Systèmes Solidworks Corporation & Anr. v.Mr. Madhav Arora & Ors.
The Plaintiffs, owners of the SOLIDWORKS software copyright, filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against infringement. The court passed several orders, including granting an ex parte ad-interim injunction and allowing various procedural applications related to evidence and service.
Dassault Systemes Solidworks Corporation & Anr. v.Mr. Shashikant Sharma & Anr.
The Plaintiffs, owners of the SOLIDWORKS software copyright, filed a suit seeking permanent injunction for infringement. The court passed several orders, including granting an ex parte ad-interim injunction and appointing a Local Commissioner to inspect the defendants' systems.
Hulm Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. v.Fantasy Sports Myfab11 Pvt. Ltd.
Hulm Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. filed an injunction seeking to prevent Fantasy Sports Myfab11 Pvt. Ltd. from unauthorizedly using its proprietary Fantasy Sports Mobile Application (EXCHANGE22). The Plaintiffs claimed that their unique game structure, components, and user interface were protected under copyright law. However, the Delhi High Court ultimately found no prima facie evidence of copyright infringement by the Defendants. Consequently, the court vacated the ex parte injunction previously granted to the Plaintiffs.
Mentor Graphics Ireland Ltd. v.Acit, Circle- 2(2)(1), International ...
Mentor Graphics Ireland Ltd. appealed against an assessment order holding that consideration received from supplying/distributing its copyrighted software was chargeable to tax as 'Royalty' under the India-Ireland Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The Tribunal, following Supreme Court precedents, ruled that payments made for resale through EULAs do not constitute royalty for the use of copyright.
M/S Map Systems v.M/S Informatic Publishing Limited
M/S Map Systems appealed against an interim order passed by the Commercial Court that confirmed an ex-parte temporary injunction against them. The plaintiff, M/S Informatic Publishing Limited, claimed that the defendants had misappropriated its proprietary remote access solution, 'RemotLog,' to create a competing product called 'MapMyAccess.' The Karnataka High Court found that the trial court's order was vague and lacked proper reasoning regarding the grant of injunction. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in part, setting aside the temporary injunction and remitting the matter back to the Trial Court for a fresh hearing.
Csg International Ltd v.Ddit International Taxation Circle 1
The assessee (Csg International Ltd) appealed against an order taxing revenue earned from supplying software as 'royalty'. The core dispute was whether the payment for using copyrighted software constituted a transfer of copyright rights or merely a license to use a copyrighted article. The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court judgments, concluding that non-exclusive licenses do not attract royalty under DTAAs.
Attachmate Corporation v.DCIT, International Taxation, Circle-1(1)(1)
The assessee, a US company dealing in software products, challenged the Assessing Officer's order which treated income received from Indian distributors as 'Royalty' chargeable under Article 12 of the India-USA DTAA. The Tribunal held that since no right in copyright was being transferred, the consideration could not be taxed as royalty.
Db Corp Ltd v.Whatsapp Llc & Ors
Db Corp Ltd filed a suit against WhatsApp LLC alleging unauthorized circulation of its copyrighted e-newspapers within private messaging groups. The Delhi High Court granted an interim ex-parte injunction, directing WhatsApp to immediately take down and block the identified infringing groups. This order underscores the platform's responsibility in preventing copyright infringement when content is illegally shared on its services.
The Foundry Visionmongers Limited v.Mesmor Studio Private Limited
The Foundry Visionmongers Limited filed a suit against Mesmor Studio Private Limited alleging rampant piracy and unauthorized use of its specialized animation software, including NUKE, NUKE X, and NUKE STUDIO. The plaintiff asserted ownership of copyright in these 'Computing Programs,' which are integral to the film and television industry's visual effects. Based on technical evidence showing 5059 infringement hits across at least 36 computer systems, the court found a prima facie case for the plaintiff.
Slk Software Services Pvt. Ltd. v.Universal Test Solutions LLP
The petitioner, a software development company, challenged an arbitration award (AC No.92/2018) passed by Respondent No. 2 (the Arbitrator). The dispute arose from a Business Alliance Agreement regarding the perpetual licensing of 'Test Magic' software. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the arbitral award.
Yennes Infotech (P) Ltd. v.The Managing Director, eNoah Solution Pvt. Ltd.
Yennes Infotech appealed an order rejecting its plaint, which sought permanent injunctions and damages for alleged copyright infringement related to customized Tally Software. The court upheld the rejection, finding that the first defendant acted as an authorized agent and the second defendant was a licensee with a valid right to use the software.
Diyora And Bhanderi Corporation v.Sarine Technologies Limited
This writ petition challenged a Case Management Order passed by the Commercial Court, which fixed the trial schedule and mandated proceedings through Video Conferencing. The original suit involved allegations of copyright infringement concerning advisory software. The High Court upheld the lower court's order, noting that it appropriately considered guidelines from the Supreme Court regarding expeditious trials during the pandemic, thereby dismissing the petition.
Adj Utility Apps Private Limited & Kyte Technologies Inc. v.Mr. Sumit Rajendra Shaha, Growthpond Technologies Private Limited, Risemetric Inc., & Rankz Inc.
This Karnataka High Court judgment records an amicable settlement between the parties involved in a copyright dispute concerning the 'Dukaan' application source code. The complex litigation, which included interim injunctions and technical evaluations by the Indian Institute of Science, was resolved through a Joint Compromise Memo. Key terms include a payment of USD 80,000 to Petitioner No. 2, an allotment of 1% common stock in Respondent No. 2-Company to one of the Petitioners, and mutual waivers of claims regarding both 'Disputed' and 'New Sourcecode'.
Qliktech International Ab v.DCIT (International Taxation)
The assessee, Qliktech International AB (a Swedish company), was assessed income from the sale of its software products (Qlikview) as 'royalty' under Section 9(1)(vi) and Article 12 of the India-Sweden DTAA. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the mere transfer of a copyrighted article does not constitute a transfer of copyright or payment for use/acquisition of rights, and thus is not taxable as royalty.
Refread Solutions Private Limited v.Scientific E-Resource
The plaintiff, a company providing digital online libraries (Refread), sued the defendant for infringing its copyright and engaging in unfair competition. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was promoting a similar product ('Read Smart Digital') using the plaintiff's tagline and had copied 87% of the website content and 100% of the product. The court found infringement and granted relief.
Less Than Equals Three Services Pvt. Ltd. v.Paras Mehra & Ors
The dispute involves Less Than Equals Three Services Pvt. Ltd., which alleges that its founders and employees established a competing business using the source code and MySQL database of the petitioner's website, quickcompany.in. The core legal challenge raised by the defendants was whether the company could maintain a copyright infringement suit without clearly pleading the identity of the author and an agreement vesting the rights in the company. The court analyzed this issue against previous judgments, ultimately finding that the plaintiff's disclosures were sufficient to overcome the preliminary objection.
Aveva Information Technology India Pvt.Ltd. v.DCIT-9(1), Mumbai
The assessee, Aveva Information Technology India Pvt.Ltd., challenged the disallowance of license fees paid to its parent company, AVEVA UK, arguing that payments for distributing copyrighted software products in India did not fall under the definition of 'royalty'. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that such distribution payments were not royalty and thus no TDS was required.
M/s. Shell India Markets Private Limited v.Income Tax Department (represented by ITO International Taxation)
The assessee, Shell India Markets Private Limited, challenged the tax department's order holding that payments made for accessing copyrighted software constituted royalty and were liable for TDS. The Tribunal examined whether the payment was for a mere user right or a transfer of copyright rights. Following precedents favoring the assessee (specifically citing the Delhi High Court), the Tribunal held that the sale/transfer of software in this context is not taxable as royalty. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the assessee was found not liable to deduct tax at source.
Dy.CIT-LTU, Centre-1 v.Tata Consultancy Services Ltd.
The appeal challenged the Assessing Officer's disallowance of expenses incurred by TCS Ltd. on imported software due to non-deduction of TDS, arguing that the payment constituted 'royalty'. The Tribunal examined whether the purchase was for acquiring a copyrighted article or merely goods for trading purposes.
Adit (It) 3(2), Mumbai v.First Advantage P. Ltd, Mumbai
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision holding that payments made by First Advantage Pvt. Ltd. for using CSPi software from FADV US were not 'royalty' subject to TDS. The core dispute was whether limited access to copyrighted software constitutes royalty or merely payment for a copyrighted article.
Sap Aktiengesellschaft v.M/S Appsone Consulting India (P) Ltd.
Sap Aktiengesellschaft filed a suit seeking permanent injunction and damages against M/S Appsone Consulting India for infringing its copyrights. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants were illegally providing training programs using their proprietary SAP ERP software modules without authorization, despite having specific license agreements in place. The court found the defendants liable for unauthorized use and granted the plaintiffs permanent injunction along with punitive damages.
Microsoft Corporation v.Mr. Rajeev Trehan
Microsoft Corporation filed a suit seeking permanent injunction, rendition of accounts, and damages against Mr. Rajeev Trehan and others for the alleged piracy of its software products. The court examined evidence establishing that the defendants were loading Microsoft's copyrighted software onto computers they sold without permission. Given the defendants' failure to appear in court, the plaintiffs successfully made out a case for infringement.
Tekla Corporation v.Survo Ghosh
The plaintiffs, Tekla Corporation, sued the defendants for unauthorized installation and use of their copyrighted software, Tekla Structures. The defendants raised a defense of 'copyright misuse,' arguing that the plaintiffs' licensing terms were restrictive and anti-competitive. The court rejected this defense, holding that Indian law does not recognize copyright misuse as a valid statutory or equitable defence.
Microsoft Corporation v.Karan Puri Prop. Of M/S Puri Computers
Microsoft Corporation filed a suit against Karan Puri Prop. Of M/S Puri Computers alleging that the defendant was infringing their copyrights by unauthorized hard-disk loading of Microsoft Windows and Office software onto branded computers sold to customers. The plaintiffs sought a permanent injunction, delivery-up of copies, and damages for piracy. Despite the defendant remaining ex-parte throughout the proceedings, the Delhi High Court found sufficient uncontroverted material on record to sustain the claim.
Microsoft Corporation v.Hitendra Idnani
Microsoft Corporation filed a suit against Hitendra Idnani, proprietor of Laptech Solutions Pvt. Ltd., alleging copyright infringement. The core issue was the unauthorized hard-disk loading and sale of pirated versions of Microsoft Windows and Office software on branded computers. Despite the defendants being ex-parte and the court initially requiring examination of expert witnesses, the Delhi High Court found sufficient material on record to establish infringement.
Director Of Income Tax v.Infrasoft Ltd.
The dispute centered on whether payments received by Infrasoft Ltd. for licensing its civil engineering software constituted royalty income under the India-US Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The Assessing Officer had taxed these receipts as royalty, leading to an appeal by the Director of Income Tax. The Delhi High Court ultimately ruled in favor of Infrasoft, holding that the payment was merely for a limited right to use the copyrighted material, not the copyright itself, and thus qualified as business income.
Microsoft Corporation v.Mr. Ganesh Wakode
Microsoft Corporation filed a lawsuit against Mr. Ganesh Wakode alleging widespread infringement of its copyrighted software titles, including various versions of Microsoft Windows and MS Office. Investigations revealed that the defendants' offices were running numerous computer systems with significant quantities of unlicensed/pirated software installations. The court ultimately ruled in favor of Microsoft, granting permanent injunctions, substantial compensatory damages, and punitive damages to deter future piracy.
Microsoft Coporation And Anr. v.Mr. Sanjay Langar And Anr.
Microsoft Corporation filed a suit seeking permanent injunction against defendants for infringing its copyrights in various software programs, specifically alleging unauthorized 'Hard-Disk Loading' onto computers sold by the defendants. The plaintiffs demonstrated that the installed software lacked genuine Certificates of Authenticity and End-User License Agreements. Given the evidence presented and the defendant's failure to appear in court, the Delhi High Court decreed the suit in favor of Microsoft Corporation.
Bea Systems Inc. v.Deputy Director of Income-tax (International Taxation), Circle 1(1), Bangalore
The dispute concerned whether payments received by M/s. BEA Systems Inc., from its Indian subsidiary for the distribution of 'shrink-wrapped software' constituted royalty, leading to tax deduction at source requirements. The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' view that the payment was indeed royalty.
Copyright infringement or licensing dispute?
From digital piracy to content licensing, Arctic's copyright practice covers enforcement, licensing structuring, and fair-use defences.