Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. This is a suit for permanent injunction, damages and delivery up of the infringing material.

2. Both the plaintiffs are companies registered in U.S.A. Plaintiff No.1 is a leading design software and digital content company having presence in more than 160 countries and providing design software to professionals, to help them in making, managing and marketing their designs for hotels, motorways, office buildings and lifts etc. and its products are stated to be installed on millions of computers all over the world, including India. Plaintiff No.2 owns softwares such as Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Office and also manufactures a large range of computer peripherals. Plaintiff No.1 has a large number of authorized resellers in India whereas plaintiff no.2 has a subsidiary company in India having office in New Delhi. It is claimed that the software developed and marketed by the plaintiffs are computer programmes within the meaning of Section 2(ffc) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and also covered under the definition of a literary work as per Section 2(o) of the Copyright Act. It is further claimed that the rights of authors of member countries of the Berne and Universal Copyright Conventions are protected under Indian Copyright laws since both India as well as U.S.A. are signatory to both these conventions. Plaintiff No.1 also claims to be owner of various trademarks in India, including AUTODESK and AutoCAD. AUTODESK is stated to have been registered in India in Class 9 vide registration No.462772. Plaintiff No.2 claims ownership of the trademarks MICORSOFT and WINDOWS. Plaintiff No.2 is the registered proprietor of trademarks in India in Clause 9 and 16 vide registration No.430449B and 430450B.

4. The right of the defendant to file the written statement was closed by this Court vide Order dated 25 th February, 2005 and the plaintiffs were directed to produce evidence by way of affidavit.

5. The plaintiffs have filed four affidavits by of affidavits. In her affidavit by way of evidence, Ms. Rohini Boaz, who is working with Autodesk India Pvt. Ltd., a subsidiary of plaintiff No.1, has stated that the Autodesk India Pvt. Ltd. has access to the license database of plaintiff No.1 which lists out all licensed software users in India in order to keep track of authorized licensees at any given point of time. The data base contains the information of authorized licensees, particulars of software licenses they own in India and serial numbers of those software programmes. She has further stated that license check dated 19th October, 2004 revealed that defendants 1 and 2 were not holding any license from plaintiff No.1 whereas defendant No.3 M/s Space Designers Syndicate was holding a license in respect of AutoCAD LT 2005, which was at serial No.342-08419184 registered on 19th September, 2004.

9. Exhibit P-7 is the certificate of registration in respect of the work AutoCAD 2002 and user‟s guide granted to Autodesk Inc. Exhibit P-8 is the copy of certificate of registration in respect of the work AutoCAD 2004 and user‟s guide granted to the plaintiff No.1. Exhibit P-9 is the copy of certificate of registration in the work Microsoft Windows 2000 Professional granted to the plaintiff no. 2 Microsoft Corporation in USA. Exhibit P-10 is the copy of certificate of registration granted to the plaintiff no. 2 in respect of the work Microsoft Office 2000 Professional. Exhibit P-11 is the copy of copyright registration granted to the plaintiff no. 2 in respect of the work Microsoft Word 2000. Exhibit P-12 is the copy of copyright registration obtained by plaintiff no. 2 in respect of Microsoft Windows 98 whereas Exhibit P-13 is the copy of copyright registration in respect of Microsoft Office 97 (Professional Edition). Several other copyright registrations have been obtained by plaintiff no. 2 with respect to various software programmes.