Super Cassettes Industries Private Ltd v. Badshah Internet Service Pvt Ltd & Anr

1. This suit by Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited (the Plaintiff) is directed against Badshah Internet Services Private Limited (Defendant NO. 1) and Mr. Chandrakant A. Patel (Defendant No. 2) seeking permanent injunction to restrain the Defendants from infringing the Plaintiffs copyright, and for damages, rendition of accounts etc.

2. Summons in the suit and notice in the application were issued on 20th October, 201 5. Thereafter, fresh summons were again issued on 15th January, 2016 by this Court. Subsequently, on 18th March, 2016, this Court passed the following order: "As per the service report, the defendants have been served. Despite pass-over, they have not appeared. The defendants were served on 08.02.2016. They did not appear before the C.S. (Comm) 591 of 2016 Pagel of 8 Joint Registrar on 04.03.2016. Accordingly, they are proceeded ex-parte. Let the affidavit along with relevant documents towards examination-in-chief be filed within six weeks. List before the Joint Registrar on 17.05.2016 for marking exhibits and list before the Court on 06.09.20 16 for hearing. Interim order is made absolute."

3. The Court thus set Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 ex parte since despite service neither of them appeared.

4. The Plaintiff then filed an affidavit of exparte evidence of Mr. S.K. Dutta on 16th May, 2016.

5. The uncontroverted facts emerging from Mr. S.K. Dutta's affidavit are as under:

(i) The Plaintiff has its registered office at E-2/16, White House, Ansari

Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi.. (ii) The Plaintiff has also contributed to the promotion and development of new talent. The Plaintiff has also launched and/or promoted many songwriters, Music-Directors and Video Directors The Plaintiff has also established a Film Production Division, widening the scope of its offerings to the public.

(iii) The Plaintiff acquires state-of-the-art equipment and uses its expertise to provide the public with high quality, both technically and artistically, C.S. (Comm) 591 of 2016 Page 2of[8] which enhances the value of the Plaintiffs intellectual property.

(iv) The Plaintiff acquires copyright in all the literary, musical and other works which it commissions and manages, through assignments from the authors or other prior owners of copyright in the same. The Plaintiff is also the producer of sound recordings and audio visual works (cinematograph films) and that the Plaintiff is itself the corporate author of and the first owner of copyright in those sound recordings and audio visual works (cinematograph films) which the Plaintiff itself produces by taking the I initiative and responsibility for the same. The Plaintiff owns all copyrights in respect of its entire repertoire which is the subject of the present plaint; the Plaintiffs repertoire thus represents huge investment by the Plaintiff.

(v) The Plaintiff's business also includes giving licenses to various organizations for the use of works in which it enjoys copyright. The Plaintiffs robust copyright licensing programme is a regular part of its business for which the Plaintiff has put full arrangements in place. Such licences are routinely sought and granted even for very brief extracts from musical and audiovisual works, since even brief extracts are commercially very valuable: the essence of any popular song is normally captured in just a few notes and/or a few key words, which are in fact all that remain in the mind of the listener.

(vi) The Plaintiffs repertoire of cinematographic films and sound recordings and copyrighted music and lyrics are its most precious assets and it is only by exploiting its copyrights, which are its main property, that the Plaintiff is able to sustain its creative activities, thereby giving opportunities to writers, C.S. (Comm) 591 of 2016:DHC:8615 composers, artists and performers to reach a wider audience, bringing new works or artistic and entertainment value before the public and contributing to culture. Its vast repertoire adds up to tens of thousands of hours of invaluable music, which has to be proactively protected from infringers.

(vii) Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 sought to infringe the copyright works belonging to the Plaintiffs repertoire by broadcasting/communicating to the public, sound recordings, underlying works (lyrics and musical compositions) and audio visual songs (cinematograph films) and other works of the Plaintiff, through their Cable network under the logo of "BADSHAH", without a licence. The Plaintiffs learnt that the Defendants are one of the largest Ground Cable Network providers in the state of Gujarat having thousands of connections.

(viii) Like any other cable operator, the Defendants, through their Cable network under the logo of "BADSHAH" also provide services such as Cable Advertising and Non Stop Entertainment wherein they make extensive use of Hindi songs from commercial films and private albums and film extracts. The said services are mainly directed to enhance viewership amongst its subscribers and also increase revenue earned through advertising.

(ix) That it was in the course of random monitoring of the Defendants' channels on a sample basis that Mr. S.K. Dutta, Deputy General Manager of the Plaintiff came to know of the said infringing broadcasts of the Defendants.

(x) The Plaintiff was able to detect various instances of infringement by the ^ e-^- Defendants through their Cable network under the logo of "BADSHAH", wherein sound recordings, cinematograph films and underlying literary and musical works belonging to the Plaintiffs repertoire of audio video songs "Jumme Ki Raat Hai" from the film "Kick"; "Ikiota mera dil tha" from the film "Two States"; "Ooh lala ooh lala" from the film "Dirty Picture" etc. were communicated to the public, without the Plaintiffs permission or license.