<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2020 (2) TMI 1687 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306680</link>
    <description>Copyright protection extends to the expression, form, arrangement and treatment of a work, not to the underlying idea or theme. Comparing the script &quot;SPM&quot; with the film &quot;Kathi&quot;, the court found the alleged similarities remote and distorted, with material differences in sequence, treatment and expression. Registration of the literary work established authorship and registration, but did not by itself prove infringement or a right to restrain the defendants. Claims relating to the Telugu remake also failed for want of evidence linking it to any copyright violation. As infringement was not proved by clear and cogent evidence, consequential claims for rendition of accounts, damages and compensation were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2023 06:44:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=705000" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1687 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306680</link>
      <description>Copyright protection extends to the expression, form, arrangement and treatment of a work, not to the underlying idea or theme. Comparing the script &quot;SPM&quot; with the film &quot;Kathi&quot;, the court found the alleged similarities remote and distorted, with material differences in sequence, treatment and expression. Registration of the literary work established authorship and registration, but did not by itself prove infringement or a right to restrain the defendants. Claims relating to the Telugu remake also failed for want of evidence linking it to any copyright violation. As infringement was not proved by clear and cogent evidence, consequential claims for rendition of accounts, damages and compensation were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306680</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>