The
dispute arose between R.C. Plasto Tanks and Pipes Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) and Ganesh Gouri Industries (respondent) over the alleged similarity between their labels, "Plasto" and "Gauri Aqua Plast." The appellant claimed that the respondent's label infringed their copyright, arguing deceptive similarity. The appellant moved for removal of the respondent's copyright registration under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957, but the Single Judge dismissed the petition. This appeal was filed to challenge that decision.
The appellant emphasized that the respondent’s label closely resembled their registered copyright label "Plasto" and could lead to confusion among consumers. They argued that the similarities were not merely coincidental but amounted to a substantial imitation. Furthermore, the appellant alleged that the registration of the respondent's label contravened the Copyright Act’s principles of originality and independent creation.
The respondent denied the allegations of deceptive similarity, claiming their label was independently designed and bore unique visual and textual elements. They also argued that their label targeted a different market segment and was unlikely to mislead consumers. Additionally, the respondent maintained that copyright registration was lawfully obtained and complied with all statutory requirements.
The Division Bench analyzed the scope of Section 50 of the Copyright Act, which permits rectification of the copyright register if the registration was granted erroneously. The court held that to establish deceptive similarity, the appellant must prove substantial reproduction or imitation. The Bench found the two labels distinct in their artistic representation, visual arrangement, and overall impact.
The court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the respondent’s label did not infringe upon the appellant’s copyright. The judgment underscored that mere resemblance in trade names is insufficient to warrant copyright rectification unless accompanied by substantial imitation of protected elements. The Bench reiterated the principle that copyright law safeguards creative expression, not the ideas or concepts underlying them.
This judgment reinforces the legal threshold for proving deceptive similarity under copyright law. It highlights the distinction between permissible similarities in trade names and impermissible imitation of creative works. The court’s decision aligns with established principles, ensuring that copyright protection does not stifle legitimate competition or independently created works.
Citation: R.C. Plasto Tanks and Pipes Pvt. Ltd. vs Ganesh Gouri Industries,
Civil Appeal No. 3305 of 2023.
Date of Decision- 5 August, 2024
Comments