What Constitutes a Groundless Threat under Section 60 of the Copyrights Act, 1957?

3rd August, 2023 - 1:14 pm Categories: Copyright 0 Comments

Groundless threat, as the name suggests, is a threat to an alleged infringer by the copyright claimant, without actually instituting any suit or action against the infringer. The Copyright Act, of 1957 (herein referred to as “the Act”), provides for civil as well as criminal remedies to an aggrieved party against acts of infringement. By Section 55 of the Act, the legislation has sought to provide civil remedies to a person whose copyright has been infringed upon. Similarly, criminal remedies are stated under Section 63 of the Act.

However, some remedies are also provided to parties who suffer due to baseless allegations of infringement or groundless threats made by the said copyright owner. The laws against groundless threats are designed to protect people from being harassed or intimidated by unfounded legal claims. Section 60 of the Act, gives a chance to such victims of groundless threats, to obtain an injunction against such threats, and to provide

It is a question to ponder upon, as to what constitutes a ‘Groundless Threat’ within the
meaning of the Copyrights Act, 1957. Section 60 of the Act states that “Where any person claiming to be the owner of copyright in any work, by circulars, advertisements or otherwise, threatens any other person with any legal proceedings or liability in respect of an alleged infringement of the copyright, any person aggrieved thereby may, notwithstanding anything
contained in section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, institute a declaratory suit that the alleged infringement to which the threats related was not, in fact, an infringement of any legal rights of the person making such threats and may

in any such suit— (a) obtain an injunction against the continuance of such threats; and (b) recover such damages, if any, as he has sustained by reason of such threats: Provided that this section shall not apply if the person making such threats, with due diligence, commences and prosecutes an action for infringement of the
copyright claimed by him.”

Looking at the language of the proviso of this section, it can be interpreted that if any
person claiming the copyright, “commences and prosecutes an action for infringement”, no declaratory suit under Section 60 can be instituted. Since the Copyrights Act, 1957 provides for criminal as well as civil remedies against an act of infringement, an action against infringement, within the meaning of the Copyrights Act, 1957, can be either criminal or civil.

In the judgment of Dhiraj Dharamdas Dewani v. Sonal Info Systems Pvt. Ltd. 2012, the Ld. Judge of the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench), stated that “Lodgment of FIR, seizure carried out by the police against the appellant and finally filing of the charge sheet is nothing but the initiation of legal proceedings and criminal liability against the appellant for the alleged infringement of the copyright of the respondents.” Therefore, it was declared that any action, as simple as filing an FIR against the alleged infringer, constitutes ‘and action against infringement’ and hence the possibility of protection under Section 60 nullifies.

Author: Vaishnavi Choudhary Rajiv Gandhi School of Intellectual Property Law, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.