Piracy of a design means an application of a design or its intimation on any article which is similar to an article belonging to that class of articles in which the particular said design is already registered by its proprietor for sale or import of such article, without the written consent of the registered proprietor. Publishing or exposing such articles with the knowledge that it is an unauthorized application of the design on them also constitutes piracy of the design.

The registered proprietor gets an exclusive right to apply the design to the article that is registered in a particular class of articles. During this right i.e. copyright over any design, other persons are prohibited from using or misusing the same design which is registered by a particular proprietor except with the permission of the said proprietor, or his licensee, or his assignee.

Section 22 of the Designs Act, 2000 deals with the piracy of the registered design. According to Section 22(1) of the Act following activities amounts to infringement to a design:

• Publishing or exposing any article of the class in question on which either the design or obvious intimation has been applied.
• Applying or causing to apply the registered design of any class of goods covered under the registration or any intimation of it.
• Importing for sale any article belonging to the class under which the particular design is registered and to which such design or fraudulent intimation has been applied.

If the design is not registered under the Designs Act, 2000 then the owner thereof will not have any legal right to take any action of infringement or piracy of the particular design against the infringer. The protection available to the registered owner is a kind of civil remedy provided under Section 22 of the Act. It is the sole responsibility of the registered owner to see that his design is not being infringed by other persons and it is his duty only to file a suit of infringement against the infringer. The reliefs which might be usually available in such cases are- Injunctions and Damages. Under this Act, no criminal action is available against the infringer. Moreover, the scheme of Section 22(1) of the Act itself reveals that the rights which are conferred on the registered owner are not to be exercised by any person other than the registered owner provided under Section 22(1).

In M.A. Karim v. M. Yasim (1934), the court held that it can be said that the following persons had infringed the copyright in design:

• A person who has applied the design or intimation thereof to an article for the sale without the license or consent of the original owner.
• A person who in furtherance has done anything to apply the said design as aforesaid.
• A person who has imported a pirated article for sale without the consent of the registered owner.
• A person who has published or exposed or caused to publish an article knowing it that it is a pirated article.

In Calico Printers Association Ltd. v. D.N. Mukherjee (1936), the court held that to prove the piracy of a registered design some facts are necessary to be proved:

• That the copyright in the design exists.
• That the said design or an obvious intimation has been applied to the alleged pirated article.
• That the said design or its intimation has been applied without obtaining the license or written consent of the registered owner of the design.
• That the article on which the design of a registered owner is applied is falling within the scope of the class of the goods covered by the registration.
• That the design has been applied to any other article for sale.

This Article Does Not Intend To Hurt The Sentiments Of Any Individual Community, Sect, Or Religion Etcetera. This Article Is Based Purely On The Authors Personal Views And Opinions In The Exercise Of The Fundamental Right Guaranteed Under Article 19(1)(A) And Other Related Laws Being Force In India, For The Time Being. Further, despite all efforts that have been made to ensure the accuracy and correctness of the information published, White Code Legal and Tax shall not be responsible for any errors caused due to human error or otherwise.