IP: Innovative Tool for Gaining Publicity

Every now and then we get to know that upcoming movie has been a case of IP controversy. I always wonder, why the launch of the new movie is never delayed or obstructed because of this. All of them release well on time and most of the times get huge success, as it is evident in case of 3 Idiots and Dabang. Now, recently Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s, Hritik and Aishwarya starrer “Guzarish” has come into picture for infringing the Copyrights of Dayanand Raajans, whose novel’s theme and characters are supposed to be lifted for the movie. Just before the release or on the release of a movie such controversies pop up and we keep on following the news that what will happen now? But, after few days for almost all the cases there is never an interesting conclusion, they simply opt for out of court settlement (Zandu balm Case against Arbaz Khan). In this case it has been reported that the sales of Zandu Balm got a reasonably good hike after this controversy, which they can never achieve through traditional marketing strategies and the movie “Dabang” plus the song “Munni Badnam” got a good popularity as well.

I get puzzled sometimes that all these disputes are fashioned just for publicity or people are really concerned for protecting their Intellectual Property. Whatever the reason may be, keeping aside the publicity stunts, I am delighted because it is creating awareness about the IP issues amongst the common man. Thanks to media that despite highlighting all the time “Breaking News on Rakhi Sawant”, they sometimes bring these critical issues into notice and people are now becoming more educated on how to protect their intellectual assets.

Copyright Infringement suit against Harry Potter's US Publisher

A trustee (Paul Allen) of the estate of the late author Adrian Jacobs filed a copyright infringement suit against the US publisher of the Harry Potter series, Scholastic Inc, on 14july, 2010. He claimed that J. K. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter series, had copied scenes from Jacob's novel, The Adventures of Willy the Wizard, to the fourth novel of the series, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. The suit followed a similar case last year, in which the trustee sued the UK publisher of the series, Bloomsbury Publishing plc in 2009 and Rowling in 2010 .Both of these cases are currently pending.

Information related to publication: Willy the Wizard was published in the United Kingdom in 1987, while Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire were published in 2000. Willy the Wizard was not published in the United States. Jacobs died in 1997.

Claimant’s claims:

1. Christopher little, a literary agent of Rowling, was originally the literary agent of Jacobs. The claim was denied by Scholastic.

2. J.K. Rowling copied a substantial part of Jacobs' visionary 1987 book The Adventures of Willy the Wizard No 1 Livid Land into her book Harry Potter and The Goblet of Fire published 13 years later by Scholastic.

Similarities stated by claimant: The complaint stated that both books, the protagonists are “required to deduce the exact nature of the central task in the competition” and had done so in a bathroom. Both books also involved "rescuing hostages imprisoned by a community of half-human, half-animal creatures."

Respondent action & Statements: Scholastic called the claim is "completely without merit". And Rowling had said in February that she had never read Jacobs' book. "JK Rowling had never heard of Adrian Jacobs nor seen, read, or heard of his book Willy the Wizard until this claim was first made in 2004".

Claimant demanded that (a)Scholastic should stop selling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (b) Destroys all of its remaining copies of the book (c) Publisher should pay the plaintiff all profits lucrative sales. The plaintiff, trustee Paul Allen, is being represented by attorneys from Andrews Kurth in New York.

For More detail click on link 1 , link 2

A lawsuit of Copyright Infringement against Porn websites.

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

justdial” will be use always. “askme.in” has to show error always

Back ground:

Burrp.com (Let it out) the local lifestyle listings company has been acquired by Infomedia18which is a part of the Network18 group. Burrp was funded by Haresh Chawla the CEO of Network18 group for an undisclosed sum. (Some says in 4.25 crore).Infomedia18 has launched the classifieds listings portal Askme.in.

Claimant:

Just dial (India’s no -1 local search engine) Mumbai based firm with a single national number 69999999 in 240 cities is containing database on million of telephone number which help people to get telephone numbers of various businesses, products and service providers. It `alleged' that a website called askme.in, which was in the same field of business, had taken its list of phone numbers and was using it as its own.

Action by claimant:

A suit was filed before the Delhi high court and along with arguments by claimant as the database is a "literary work as defined under the Copyright Act of 1957 and thus askme.in could not replicate it. As evidence, the court was told there were "identical spelling mistakes in the two databases, which suggested that both came from the same source.''

Literary work" includes computer programmes, tables and compilations including computer "literary data bases ;

People response:

Rajesh Khona (corporate head at Just dial ) said 1."We had painstakingly built a database of millions of telephone numbers over 14 years. It took hard work and a lot of effort to compile these numbers,''

2. "So we were taken aback when we discovered that a website had hijacked all our data and was using it to provide a similar service,''

3. "The legal victory is a huge boost for us,''

Court ruling:

The Delhi court passed an injunction order on 31 Jan, 2010 against askme.in and restrained it from carrying on with its business. Justice Indermeet Kaur observed that in case the order was not passed, JustDial would face "irreparable loss.''

A proof of copying database: There were "identical spelling mistakes in the two databases, which suggested that both came from the same source

The High Court has also appointed commissioners to visit Infomedia18 Ltd’s office in Delhi and Mumbai and to seize and take into custody all the CPUs, compact, floppy discs and/or other storage media containing any part of the commercial or business directory database belonging to Just Dial

The directive by the courts to direct askme.in to shut operations and cease to exist is also in favour of Justdial’s stance.
sources :times of india 2. pluggd.in 3. watchblog.com 4 .oneindia.in