Case Name: Sunil S/o Darshan Saberwal vs Star India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: Commercial Intellectual Property Suit No. 236 of 2024, Interim Application No. 3347 of 2024
Date of Judgment: 18 August 2025
Quorum: Hon’ble Justice Sandeep V. Marne [Single Judge, High Court of Bombay]
Facts
Sunil S/o Darshan Saberwal (Plaintiff) is a film producer who produced a Hindi feature film titled LOOTERE in 1993. The plaintiff registered the film title LOOTERE in various classes such as feature films, TV serials, web series, and web films with film producer associations. The plaintiff discovered that the defendants, Star India Pvt. Ltd., and others had produced and streamed an episodic web series (LOOTERE) on Disney+ Hotstar in March 2024 under the same title. The plaintiff claimed the right to use the film title LOOTERE and copyright for the cinematograph film and asked the Court for a declaration and injunction to restrain defendants from using the title LOOTERE. The defendants denied plaintiffs claims on several points including: title alone is not copyrightable, the storylines are different, and the registrations for associations can’t be binding on non-members. None of the facts were disagreed upon but all were subject to legal argument.
Issues
Whether copyright attaches to the title of a film or entertainment work alone.
Whether title registration with film producer associations grants enforceable rights against others.
Whether the defendant’s use of title LOOTERE infringes on the plaintiff’s copyright or other legal right.
Whether the plaintiff was entitled to a temporary injunction to restrain use of title.
Legal Provisions Involved
Copyright Act, 1957 (Section 13 of the act regarding copyrightable works).
Principles of copyright relating to literary and cinematograph works.
Some principles of contract law relating to the registration of private associations.
Relevant decisions by the Supreme Court and High Courts concerning copyright of titles.
Arguments
Petitioner’s Arguments
The plaintiff claimed copyright in the film LOOTERE and exclusive rights in the title as a result of its registration with producers’ associations. It was claimed that the defendants’ use of the title in their web series infringed copyright and the plaintiff’s rights in the title. Examples of decisions that recognized enforceable rights in titles and the significance of registering the title with producers’ associations to prevent unauthorized use of the title were provided. The plaintiff said that there was no delay in bringing the action and the ongoing streaming of the web series made a case for a court granting relief by way of injunction.
Respondents’ Arguments
Defendants stated that there are no copyright in simple titles relying on the Supreme Court decision Krishika Lulla & Ors. v. Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta & Anr, (2016) 2 SCC 521. They mentioned the story of the web series was different from the plaintiffs’ original cinematograph film and there was no literary work and/ or cinematograph copyright infringement. They said the registration with film associations was an internal contractual arrangement that had no statutory authority, and especially if the association is unable to enforce its rights against non-members, which was the case, as Defendant No.1 was not a member. They also claimed that because the plaintiff sat on its rights for too long and the web series release had taken place, the plaintiff is no longer able to seek injunctive relief; it would only have a claim for damages.
Analysis
The court noted that copyright exclusively subsists in original literary works, cinematograph films, and sound recordings under the Copyright Act. Titles do not constitute as “work,” and do not have the originality required for copyright’s protection, which is aligned with authority such as Maxwell v.Hogg, (1867) LR 2 Ch App 307, Francis Day & Hunter Ltd. v. Twentieth Century Fox, and others, (1939) 2 Ch. 42. Registration of titles with producer associations was a private, internal contractual mechanism which had no statutory authority and was unenforceable against non-members. As Defendant No.1 was not a member of the association at the time the registration took place, no legal right arose against it. In addition, the court acknowledged the common practice in the industry of allowing works to share the same title, without it being an infringement, as long as the works are truly dissimilar. The delay taken by the plaintiff in commencing the suit and the web series’ streaming prior to suit were major aggravating factors in being granted any injunction relief.
Judgment
The court dismissed the plaintiff’s motion for a temporary injunction, deciding:
Copyright does not exist in the title LOOTERE standing alone.
Registration with an organization does not provide enforceable rights against non-members.
There was no evidence of copyright infringement of the literary work and cinematograph.
The plaintiff was unable to establish prima facie case, irreparable harm, or balance of convenience.
The plaintiff’s delay in commencing suit and the ongoing streaming of the web series made injunctive relief impossible.
The plaintiff can seek for damages but not claim injunctive relief at this stage.
Conclusion
The decree confirmed copyright protection of titles alone, disallowed copyright protection in India of titles, and provided corpus to sui generis copyright protection in the entertainment industry as he asserted registration with industry bodies had only strictly contractual protection provided for its members and was not statutory rights. The Court also highlighted the obligation to act to protect works; and that any plea of infringement is rooted in original works, of which a title alone could not establish copyright infringement. This case helped clarify for future reference the law on film title protecting, as a case of first impression for litigators in the entertainment industry.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY __ Kondala Phani Priya
