(1.) The plaintiff's grievance of violation of its copyright in the artistic works applied to upholstery fabrics and the allegation of an attempt to pass off the goods of the defendants as that of the plaintiff has given rise to the present litigation.
(2.) The plaintiff is a company incorporated under the laws of the USA and is stated to be engaged worldwide in the business relating to manufacturing, marketing, selling and exporting of upholstery fabrics directly or through its subsidiaries and affiliates. The brand name of the plaintiff is stated to be Microfibres. The business of the plaintiff is stated to have commenced in the year 1926 and the plaint states that on the upholstery fabrics are printed, unique and original artistic works which are conceptualized and drawn/printed by either its employees or other persons who have assigned the copyright in the works to the plaintiff. More than 1000 people are stated to be employed by the plaintiff and a global annual turnover is stated to be more than $ 200 million. The plaintiff's product under the brand name Microfibres is stated to be sold in more than hundred countries including India and has wide presence in the manufacture and sale of synthetic nylon flox fabric and velvet upholstery fabric.
(3.) The plaintiff claims to have extensive international reputation with manufacturing bases and operations in several countries of the world and there are more than 250 brands of microfibres which are apparently sold in India. The plaintiff claims to have obtained registration of copyright of most of its original artistic works in the drawings applied by it on upholstery fabric and the details of such registration are set out in para 7 of the plaint. However during the course of arguments, the plaintiff concentrated the claim in respect of some of these artistic works in respect of which it was alleged that the defendants had violated the copyright. The details of the same are as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_58_ILRDLH15_2006Html1.htm</FRM>