Skip to content

CS Executive · Economic, Commercial and Intellectual Property Laws · Law relating to Designs

Meera Textiles holds a registered design for a saree border pattern. Without her written consent, a rival firm, Kaveri Fabrics, applies an obvious imitation of the design to sarees of the same class for the purpose of sale. Under the Designs Act, 2000, this act is:

It is piracy of the registered design. During the existence of copyright, applying the design or any fraudulent or obvious imitation to an article in the registered class for sale, without the proprietor's licence or written consent, is unlawful. Exact copying is not required.

  1. APiracy of the registered design, while copyright in the design existsCorrect
  2. BLawful, because only an exact copy is prohibited
  3. CLawful, because sarees are not an article covered by the Act
  4. DPermitted if Kaveri Fabrics publishes the design first

Explanation

Section 22(1)(a) bars applying the registered design, or any fraudulent or obvious imitation of it, to an article in the registered class for sale without the proprietor's licence or written consent. The bar is not limited to exact copies, so the option claiming only exact copies are prohibited is wrong.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Law relating to Designs shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Law relating to DesignsFree diagnostic mock

More Law relating to Designs questions