design piracy | Intellepedia

Court Grants ex-parte Order in Favor of Designer Gaurav Gupta

Fashion design process illustration showing dress pattern sketches, a designer drawing a dress on paper with sewing tools, and outlines of accessories like bags, shoes, and hats.

The Delhi High Court granted a permanent injunction and damages to Gaurav Gupta after finding willful trademark, copyright, and design infringement by the defendant. The judgment reinforces the legal remedies available to fashion designers in India for protecting their intellectual property rights.

Design Piracy and Self-Inking Stamps: How the Informed Observer Test Saved Addprint

A visual comparison of two self-inking stamp designs—Addprint's and Trodat Flashy 6904—showcasing multiple differences. On the left, Addprint's design features include a smoky curved top cover, a dug-out shape on the bottom of the top cover, and two line grips connected with a dugged bottom line. On the right, Trodat's design includes a crystal clear top cover, a plain fluent back body face, a four-line grip, smooth bottom and top covers, a dugged bottom cover, an air ventilator, and a top cover with a hole. At the centre is a colourful graphic stating “SAME SAME But DIFFERENT” alongside stick figures holding mismatched puzzle pieces, symbolising design differences.

In a design piracy case involving self-inking stamps, the Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal filed by Trodat GmbH and its affiliate against an order that allowed Addprint India Enterprises to manufacture and market a redesigned stamp. The Court held that the proposed design did not amount to piracy under Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000.