The High Court of Karnataka has refused to quash the FIR against Congress party leaders Rahul Gandhi, Jairam Ramesh and Supriya Shrinate for the alleged copyright violation of music from the hit film KGF Chapter-2. The single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna pronounced the judgment on Wednesday, dismissing the petition filed by the three Congress leaders. M Naveen Kumar of MRT Music, a sister concern of Lahari Music, had filed the complaint at Yeshwantpur police station in Bengaluru alleging that the music from the film, to which it has the copyright, was used by the Congress party in a promotional video of 'Bharat Jodo Yatra'. The HC in its order dismissing the petition said, "The petitioners appear to have tampered with source code without permission, which would undoubtedly amount to infringement of the copyright of the company. The petitioners seem to have taken the copyright of the company for granted. Therefore prima facie all these as a matter of evidence has to be trash
The lawsuit has a list of around 1,700 songs that has been included in multiple copyright notices to Twitter, asking the court to fine the micro-blogging platform up to $150,000 for each violation
Thom Browne may have escaped consequences for the extra stripe in the Adidas matter, but this might really be an exception to the rule
Court says local commissioner appointed by it found evidence of infringement on part of the defendants, and also unearthed attempts them to destroy evidence
Karnataka HC passes stay order on probe against the three in a copyright infringement case filed by MRT Music over the use of a song from 'KGF Chapter 2' for Congress Party's Bharat Jodo Yatra
The plea was filed by Neetu Singh and KD Campus, seeking to restrain users from sharing their videos, lectures, and books on Telegram. The matter will be heard again on February 14 next year
Small businesses violate trademark laws with deceptively similar brand names which not only confuses consumers, but also leads to production of fake goods resulting in huge losses to corporates
Rajat Sharma and India TV assured the Delhi High Court on Tuesday that the show has been removed from all platforms
The Delhi High Court has directed Telegram to disclose, in a sealed cover, the details of the channels and devices used to disseminate alleged copyright infringing content
The Delhi High Court has said the defence of free speech and the right to privacy cannot be used by any entity, including an infringer, to escape the consequences of illegal actions. The remark was made by the high court while directing messaging platform Telegram to disclose in a sealed cover the details of channels, including their mobile numbers and IP addresses, disseminating certain content in violation of copyright law. Justice Prathiba M Singh, while dealing with a lawsuit by a coaching centre and its owner against the illegal sharing of its teaching material on various channels on the platform under masked identities, stated that Telegram's reliance on the laws of privacy and right to freedom of speech and expression was completely inapposite in these facts and circumstances." The judge said unless the identity of the operators of the infringing channels is disclosed, the plaintiffs would be rendered remediless for recovering damages. Reliance was placed by Telegram on the
Pirated music and video content cost the US and leading economies of the world billions each year, according to DataProt. What all include digital piracy? Let's take a peek into its dark world.
Apple has lost a copyright battle against Corellium, as a federal judge in Florida rejected Apples claims that Corellium had violated copyright law with its software
Music company T-Series has issued notices to many social video platforms, including Bolo Indya, Mitron, MX Player's Takatak, Triller and Josh, for copyright violations
The company put a label on a video posted by the @TeamTrump account that said, This media has been disabled in response to a claim by the copyright owner
The court said it is clear that the onus is on Singh to prove that he is the owner of the copyright and it shall be his endeavour to prove the same.
The ruling comes against the backdrop of a four-year-old suit filed by textbook publishers