Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: reverse engineering in Ritika Private Limited vs Biba Apparels Private Limited on 23 March, 2016Matching Fragments
39. Shri Arun Jaitley, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant in FAO (OS) No. 326/2007 titled as Dart Industries Inc. and Anr. v. Techno Plast and Ors. had only made submissions in the present appeal in respect of Section 15 of the Copyright Act to the extent it could affect the appeal filed by his clients. He had advanced a very attractive argument as to the three stages of processes leading to the eventual designed product. He submitted that the first stage is of the preparation of drawing or artistic work which leads to the production of mould/engraving which is the second stage and such mould/engraving leads to the final commercially marketable product, which is the third stage. He has also submitted that the products of the respondent were made by the process of reverse engineering starting from the final product leading to the second stage of creating a moulding, and from it a final drawing. His plea was based upon the premises that the mould and the drawing of the appellant are copyright protectable under the Copyright Act and cannot be or are incapable of forming part of the design registration regime. It is submitted that the product of the respondent involves the copying of the mould/drawing of the appellant.