But at this stage, I have to find out from the records as to what is the admitted case of the parties as evidence has not been led and the suit is at preliminary stage. Shubh Vivah based on concept of spouse selection in any form as a reality TV show cannot be permitted as that has been conceived by the plaintiff at the first instance. Franchi RPC At this stage, the question for consideration before me is as to whether the idea conceived by the plaintiffs of producing a reality TV programme is a novel concept and same could be protected. Another contention which has been urged before me by Mr. It was contended that when plaintiff has submitted its programme proposal for consideration, the same was done on the understanding that the broadcaster will either accept it or reject it.

Whereas in para 98 at page of part II file, it has been mentioned that Raveena Kohli was not present at the meeting on 31st August, as alleged by the plaintiff, however careful reading of para 10 of the same affidavit would show that presence of Raveena Kohli in the said meeting was admitted by the defendants. If the defendant’s work is nothing but a literal imitation of the copy-righted work with some variations here and there it would amount to violation of the copyright. Shubh Vivah – Episode 75 – 11th June published 5 year ago “Every average girl in India, has a picture of an ideal dream husband in terms of looks, nature and outlook towards life. Where however apart from the similarities appearing in the two works there are also material and broad dissimilarities which negative the intention to copy the original and the coincidences appearing in the two works are clearly incidental no infringement of the copyright comes into existence. It was contended that the proposed TV programme of the defendants Shubh Vivah launched by defendant according to Times of India, Delhi Edition dated Therefore, the possessor of the confidential information still has a long start over any member of the public.

However, pages 78, 79 and 80 were not sent to the defendant. As a matter of fact, by way of para 4 of the said reply what plaintiff was made to understand was that the Shubh Vivaah to be launched by the defendants was not going to be anything like Swayamvar which was conceived by the plaintiff. On vifah basis of aforesaid submissions, Mr. The aforesaid concept titled vivqh was disclosed in early by the plaintiff to his wife and one Mr.

Report Detail Video contains prohibited content. Rekha Nigam after the presentation showed enthusiasm of the defendants about plaintiff’s proposal for Swayamvar as they had inter alia requested for some more details on logistical timelines.

When the plaintiff came to know in August, that defendant no. It was contended that defendants have made many episodes whereas the plaintiff has yet to commence making any episode and, therefore, interlocutory injunction cannot be granted against the defendants and in this connection he has cited Colgate Palmolive India Ltd.

Last 7 days Last 7 days Last 30 days Last Year.

It was also admitted that the presentation was made on 10th November, Privacy Public Private Choose whether to make your playlist public or private. How it is done, who plays as anchor person, gifts are given or not, may be the various elements which may differ but vivau Shubh Vivah is based on match making process to be televised on the TV as a real life drama, defendants cannot reap the fruits of labour put in by the plaintiff in this regard.


Desai that even the notice dated The plaintiff team described the concept of Swayamvar, highlighting its salient attractions as world’s first unique real life entertainment television series, that would be studio based with video snapshots used for introduction. The printed version of the presentation and an internal discussion document dated 4. In support of his contention, he has relied on R.

But in others the criteria may be met by a short unelaborated shibh of an idea. The love they share, the bonds they cement, the faith they place on each other and the dedication with which they try to change the harsh realities of their lives. It has been claimed that plaintiff has got very good reputation in his episoxe of activities and has introduced commercial sponsored programme of Doordarshan and has been associated with serials such as ‘Buniyad’, ‘Rajni’ etc.

Whether it is described as originality or novelty or ingenuity or otherwise, there must be some product of the human brain which suffices to confer a confidential nature upon the information.

In case the plaintiff launches its programme ‘Swayamvar’ within a period of four months from the date of the order, the defendants are further restrained from transmitting or showing or exhibiting or televising its programme ‘Shubh Vivah’ or any other programme having its subject or theme of match making for a further period of two months.

The show limited to the engagement.

Mr. Anil Gupta And Anr. vs Mr. Kunal Dasgupta And Ors. on 3 June,

With the rejoinder, the plaintiff has filed Annexure UG 15, wherein it has been reported:. It was contended by Mr. Where the theme is the same but is presented and treated differently so that the shuhh work becomes a completely new work, no question of violation of copyright arises. Some of the essential elements of rpisode programme as contained in the copyright concept note was to the following effect:. How to handle reservations of the potential participants including option of opting out anytime during the show.

He placed reliance on Terrapin v. In that meeting defendant no.

Результаты поиска

Therefore, the possessor of the confidential information still has a long start over any member of the public. It was contended that inconsistent stand has been taken by the plaintiff. It was the case of the plaintiff that plaintiff saw an article in the financial Shubu, Mumbai Edition, dated In television industry, it matters as to who has gone first, once the reality show is televised on the television, the same comes within the purview of public domain and anybody else can take up the same concept and launch their own television programme.

I have given my careful consideration to the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties. Now let me deal with another submission of Mr. He has been the founder member and convener of the Indian Broadcasters Association. The plaintiff has prima facie proved that the defendants were aware of the concept of swayamvar and if injunction is not granted then the defendants will launch its own TV serial Shubh Vivah which will episose televise match making and if that is permitted, it will be giving premium to the defendants and robbing of the plaintiff of his work.


Plaintiff applied for registration after developing the concept as a literary work under the Copyright Act. Desai that as the concept was disclosed to others and that amounts disclosure made by the plaintiff to the world, now it is not possible for plaintiff to get an injunction restraining the defendants from disclosing what was in common knowledge and in support of his contention, he has relied upon O.

Vociferous plea was raised by the defendants that there was no originality in the concept of the plaintiff. Defendants have not controverter the aforesaid affidavits.

Desai that as stated in para 14 and 15 of the plaint, no concept note was sent by the plaintiff along with the letter dated If the concept, format and structure which were the key elements of the plaintiff’s proposal, the same has been received by the defendant, it cannot be said that defendants were not aware of the salient feature of the concept and the format of the vivh match making TV reality show.

On the basis of aforesaid suhbh it was contended by Mr. In other words, in order to be actionable the copy must be a substantial and material one which at once leads to the conclusion that the defendant is guilty of an act of piracy.

Desai that in the written statement in para 9, it has been fpisode by the defendants that concept note was not a confidential document and there was no confidentiality in such disclosure as per usual practice in the industry.

Urmila Gupta, Samir Gupta, wife and son of the plaintiff, who gave a power-point presentation to the large team of the executive of the defendants. Urmila Gupta, Sanjoy Roy where it has been stated that the key elements of the format of the defendants’ programme Shubh Vivaah are as under: Franchi RPC List this matter for further proceedings before appropriate Court according to Roster on Video was deactivated by our moderator.

The said article informed that defendant no. As a matter of fact, defendant denied that in the meeting in August,Sanjoy Roy was present. To buttress his arguments Mr. Therefore, the defendants by using the said information imparted to it in strict confidence by the plaintiff breached the confidence reposed by the plaintiff in them. Set to reflect images and symbols of marriage celebration. It was also somewhere in middle ofthe defendants started the idea of having their own reality TV show.