TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (2) TMI 197
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs, directors, agents, franchiesees, servants and all others acting for and on their behalf, from directly or indirectly reproducing/storing/ installing and/or using pirated/unlicensed software‟s of the Plaintiffs, thereby Infringing Copyright in the Plaintiffs‟ computer programs/software titles; II. A Decree of Delivery up of all the impugned products being unlicensed/pirated software contained in hard disks, compact disks, floppy disks or other storage media and including any CD Writers/Burners, or any other material infringing or aiding in the infringement of the Copyright of the Plaintiffs, such as infringing copies of user Instruction Manuals of the abovementioned software titles, lying in the possession of the De....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... software programmes are popular, famous and renowned throughout the world. 3. Plaintiff no. 2 is stated to be a wholly owned marketing subsidiary of plaintiff no. 1 which has been incorporated and registered under Indian Companies Act, 1956. Plaintiff no. 2 has been set up in 1989 to promote anti-piracy awareness campaigns and to support plaintiff no. 1 or its affiliates. The products of plaintiff no. 1 are distributed in India through various authorised distributors. 4. The relevant facts of the present case are that the plaintiffs in August 2009, upon receiving information of the defendants' infringing activities regarding unlicensed use of the plaintiffs' software programme, immediately initiated an investigation. The plaintiffs a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....made by the plaintiffs. 7. On 09th September, 2009, this Court by an ex parte order restrained the defendants, its employees, agents, servants etc. from using the plaintiffs' unlicensed software till the next date of hearing. On the said date of hearing, three Local Commissioners were also appointed to visit three different premises of the defendants in Kolkata. 8. On 18th September, 2009, when the Local Commissioners visited the respective offices of the defendants, they found a total number of 76 computer systems installed with around 100 unlicensed/pirated software titles of the plaintiffs. 9. Despite the defendants having been represented by their counsel on 12th April, 2010, no written statement has been filed till date. Since....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he ex parte evidence as well as document placed on record, this Court is of the opinion that plaintiffs have in fact proved the facts stated in the plaint and have also exhibited the relevant documents in support of their case. Since the plaintiffs' evidence has gone unrebutted, said evidence is accepted as true and correct. 12. Moreover, the software programmes as developed and marketed by the plaintiffs are a 'computer programme' within the meaning of Section 2(ffc) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and also included in the definition of a literary work as per Section 2(o) of the Copyright Act, 1957. The plaintiffs' work are also protected in India under Section 40 of the Copyright Act, 1957 read with the International Copyright Order 1999 as....