Artistic works constituting substantial reproductions lack originality and are liable for copyright expungement under Section 50.

The Petitioner, a manufacturer of bicycle parts (specifically "Ball Head Racers"), holds several copyright registrations for its distinctive packaging/trade dress dating back to 1974.

In 2002, the Petitioner discovered that Respondent No. 1 was using deceptively similar packaging and obtained an interim injunction.

Despite various contempt proceedings and the quashing of Respondent’s search certificates by the High Court in 2008, the Respondent obtained the Impugned Registrations (A-85865/2009 and A-85866/2009).

The Petitioner filed this petition under Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957, seeking the removal of these registrations from the Register, alleging they are non-original colorable imitations of the Petitioner’s works.

1. Whether the Petitioner qualifies as a "person aggrieved" under Section 50 of the Copyright Act to maintain a rectification petition.

2. Whether the Impugned Registrations lack originality and constitute a substantial reproduction of the Petitioner’s prior registered artistic works.

The court applied Section 50 of the Copyright Act, 1957, which allows an "aggrieved person" to seek rectification of entries wrongly made or remaining on the Register.

It relied on the principle that copyright protection requires "originality" and does not subsist in works that are slavish imitations.

Following Marico Ltd. v. Jagit Kaur (2018) and Parle Products P. Ltd. v. J.P. & Co. (1972), the court applied the "broad features" test, establishing that labels must be compared based on overall similarity in color scheme, layout, and arrangement rather than a side-by-side microscopic distinction.

The court first determined that the Petitioner is an "aggrieved person" because it is the registered owner of similar artistic works and a direct trade competitor; the Respondent's registrations dilute the Petitioner's goodwill.

Upon a factual comparison, the court found that the Impugned Registrations (A-85865/2009 and A-85866/2009) were substantially similar to the Petitioner’s earlier registrations (A-55236/98 and A-55238/98).

Specifically, both parties used identical white-and-blue or white-and-red color schemes, placed circular logos in the center, and utilized identical font placements for descriptive text like "BALL HEAD RACERS" and "10 SET OF THREE".

The court also noted that a permanent injunction had already been granted against the Respondent in a related civil suit (CS 127/2002) for copyright infringement of the same packaging.

Consequently, the court reasoned that the Respondent's works lacked the requisite originality for protection.

The court ordered that Copyright Registration Nos. A-85865/2009 and A-85866/2009 be cancelled and expunged from the Register of Copyright.

The Registry was directed to communicate this order to the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks for compliance and updating of the official website within four weeks.