Krishika Lulla & Ors. v. Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta & Anr.

“Can the title of a literary work be protected under copyright law?”

Short Description :

The appellant, Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta, claimed he held copyright over the title “Desi Boys”, which was the title of a story synopsis he had written and registered. Upon seeing a film titled “Desi Boyz”, he initiated a criminal complaint alleging copyright infringement. The Supreme Court was asked to determine if titles alone are eligible for copyright protection under Indian law.

Facts :

⦁ Devkatta authored a story titled Desi Boys and registered it with the Film Writers Association on November 25, 2008. He shared a synopsis via email on October 14, 2009, which was forwarded further.

⦁ A film named Desi Boyz was later produced and released (worldwide) in November 2011. Devkatta claimed misuse of his title and filed a criminal complaint.

⦁ The Bombay High Court refused to quash the complaint, prompting the appellants to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Findings :

⦁ The Supreme Court held that titles, being merely names, lack originality and substance and thus are not protected under copyright law, except in extraordinary circumstances where the title itself is highly inventive.

⦁ Citing precedents such as Hogg v. Maxwell, Francis Day & Hunter Ltd. v. Twentieth Century Fox, E.M. Forster v. A.N. Parasuram, Kanungo Media Ltd. v. RGV Film Factory, and R. Radha Krishnan v. A.R. Murugadoss, the Court affirmed that using a similar title does not constitute copyright infringement.

Judgment :

The Supreme Court quashed the criminal complaint filed under Sections 63 (Copyright Act), 406, and 420 (IPC), concluding that the title “Desi Boys” is not protected by copyright law.

Judgment Date : October 15, 2015

Bench : Justice S.A. Bobde and Justice Madan B. Lokur

Suggestion / Legal Implication :

⦁ Titles cannot be protected under copyright, but creators may seek protection via trademark registration or passing-off actions if the title is distinctive and associated with goodwill.

⦁ The decision also provides clarity for creative industries, reaffirming that common or unoriginal titles are not exclusive intellectual property.