No copyright subsist in a title of work #indianlaws

A title of a work has been considered to be not fit to be the subject of copyright law. A title by itself is in the nature of a name of a work and is not complete by itself, without the work. The title in question cannot therefore be considered to be a ‘literary work’ and, hence, no copyright can be said to subsist in it, vide Section 13 of the Copyright Act.

Whether one can claim copyright over the title given to synopsis of a story, and if yes, is the infringement thereof punishable under Section 63 of the Copyright Act? The Supreme Court answered in negative.

Section 13(1) of the Copyright Act lays down works following classes of work wherein copyright subsists, namely (a) original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works; (b) cinematograph films; and (c) sound recording.

The instant matter pertained to a dispute where copyright was claimed only on the title “Desi Boys” given to synopsis of the story. The accused had made a movie with the similar title with name (title) spelt as “Desi Boyz”.

A title of a work has been considered to be not fit to be the subject of copyright law. A title by itself is in the nature of a name of a work and is not complete by itself, without the work. As per Section 13, copyright subsists in original literary work. In the first place a title does not qualify for being described as “work”. It is incomplete in itself and refers to the work that follows. Secondly, the combination of the two words “Desi” and “Boys” cannot be said to have anything original in it. They are extremely common place words in India. The title “Desi Boys”, even if assumed to be as work, has nothing original in it in the sense that its origin cannot be attributed to the claimant. These words do not even qualify for being described as ‘literary work’.

The title in question cannot therefore be considered to be a ‘literary work’ and, hence, no copyright can be said to subsist in it, vide Section 13. It was accordingly held that no criminal complaint for infringement can stated to be tenable on such basis.

[Krishika Lulla & Ors. vs. Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta & Anr.]

(SC, 15.10.2015)

Criminal Appeal No. 258 of 2013