Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: copyright in computer programs in Microsoft Corporation vs Mr. I. Sadiq Batcha & Ors. on 1 July, 2009Matching Fragments
8. It is stated in the Plaint that the Plaintiff's computer programs are "works" that have been first published in the USA. These programs have been created by employees or the Plaintiff, for the Plaintiff. Under the US Copyright Law US Code Title 17, Section 20(1)(b), the copyright in a work created by an employee belongs to the employer under the 'Workfor Hire' doctrine. The computer programs along with the User Instruction Manuals constitute 'computer software' and are 'original literary' works as contemplated under Section 2 (o) and Section 13 (1) (a) of the Copyright Act, 1957. The Plaintiff is the owner of the copyright in aforesaid works.
11. The copyright owned by the Plaintiff in its software can be broadly divided under two heads:
Copyright in the Computer Programs existing mainly in the Object Code and Source Code versions.
12. The reproduction in any material form, including publication, performance, dissemination, translation, adaptation, the use, distribution, sale, offer for sale of any of the above material without the Plaintiff's consent, would amount to infringement of the Plaintiff's copyright as contemplated under Section 51 of the Act. These acts of infringement are further divided into two categories namely:
28. As per plaintiff, the above features mentioned led to the conclusion that the software supplied by the defendants are pirated versions and therefore, the defendants have violated the copyright in computer programs of the Plaintiff. Hence, the present suit has been filed by the plaintiff.
29. The suit as well as the interim application for injunction was listed before court on 26th November, 2001 when summons were issued to the defendants in the suit and notices were issued in the application and an ex parte ad interim injunction was passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants restraining them from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale unauthorized copies of software and hardware of the plaintiff and the defendants were further restrained from distributing to the public the counterfeit/unlicensed version of the plaintiff's software pre-loaded into the hard disc of the computers in any manner. In terms of Section 5(2) of the Delhi High Court Act as amended by the Delhi High Court(Amendment) Act and interims of office order dated 28th August, 2003 the suit was transferred to the District Court as its valuation was below Rs.20 lacs. Prior to the transfer, the defendants filed the written statement and denied all the allegations made by the plaintiff against the defendants.