Intellectual Property Infringement in Fashion Industry; Reading in light of Gaurav Gupta Case

INTRODUCTION

In India, novel fashion designs have protected under copyright law and sometimes under designs law. This enables the designers to get the substantial growth as such rights provide protection from the competitors. Gaurav Gupta, a renowned Indian designer, has made a significant impact on the global fashion scene with his distinctive style characterized by lavish swirls, structured patterns, and vibrant hues. His journey began in 2005 when he established his design label, and since then, he has consistently pushed the boundaries of couture with his futuristic designs and visionary concepts.[4]

Gaurav Gupta and his company owned particular types of Copyrights, designs and trademarks for their fashion Designs. Recently, Delhi High Court in its judgement Reflect Sculpt Pvt Ltd vs Abdusalam [5] dated on 3 April 2024, granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of the Gaurav Gupta and his company Reflect Sculpt Pvt Ltd (trademarked as Gaurav Gupta Studios[6]), restraining the Defendant (Abdus Salam Khan) from using the registered Intellectual properties.

PROTECTION OF COPYRIGHTS IN FASHION INDUSTRY

The Copyright Act[7], provides a legal framework for safeguarding original literary, artistic, dramatic, and musical works. While its primary focus is on traditional forms of copyright protection, it also has implications for the fashion industry, particularly through Sections 14(c) and 51. Under section 14(c) of Copyright Act, "original artistic works" are defined to include "three-dimensional works, such as sculptures, carvings, and models." Although fashion designs are not explicitly mentioned, this provision may be relevant to the protection of fashion designs that are embodied in three-dimensional forms, such as mannequins or prototypes. If a fashion designer creates a unique and original three-dimensional form to display or showcase their designs, that form could potentially be protected as an original artistic work pursuant to Section 14(c). However, the specific elements that constitute originality and the scope of protection would need to be determined on a case-by-case basis.

Copyright Act, further, provides a limited exception known as "fair use" that permits certain non-infringing uses of copyrighted material without the copyright owner's authorization.[8] This exception can be particularly relevant to the fashion industry, where designers often draw inspiration from existing works, including those protected by copyright. The fashion world, renowned for its innovative designs and trends, often walks a fine line between inspiration and infringement. While designers may be tempted to directly replicate elements from existing copyrighted works, such as iconic dresses or unique patterns, the fair use doctrine offers a potential shield. This legal principle allows for certain limited uses of copyrighted material, such as for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.

PROTECTION OF TRADEMARK IN FASHION INDUSTRY

The Trademarks Act, 1999, provides several provisions applicable to the fashion industry, with Section 30(2)(a) being particularly significant. This section addresses the concept of "passing off," prohibiting the use of a trademark identical or similar to a registered mark, even if the goods or services differ, when such use is likely to cause confusion or harm to the registered mark's reputation. In the fashion industry, where brands often invest substantially in their identity and reputation, Section 30(2)(a) is crucial. It prevents consumer confusion and protects against unauthorized use of a trademark that could dilute the original brand's distinctiveness.

For instance, a well-known fashion brand cannot have its logo imitated by another brand, even if the products differ, as consumers may associate the similar logo with the original brand. Moreover, Section 30(2)(a) safeguards against unfair advantage and detriment to a trademark's reputation A new brand cannot exploit a well-known brand's reputation by using a similar trademark or diluting its distinctiveness through advertising or other means.

JUDGEMENT OF DELHI HIGH COURT

On 3^rd April 2024, the Delhi High Court[9] granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction, issued under CPC[10] favour of Reflect Sculpt company and Gaurav Gupta, restraining defendant from infringing upon their intellectual property rights in the fashion industry. The Court found that the Defendant's activities constituted counterfeiting of the Plaintiffs' original artistic works, replicating their unique designs and using the Plaintiff's mark 'GAURAV GUPTA' without authorization. The defendant was prohibited from manufacturing, selling, advertising, or promoting counterfeit garments that replicated the Plaintiffs' original designs. The Court's decision was based on the Plaintiffs' allegations of copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and unfair competition.

Gaurav Gupta has been in the industry for 18 years. His designs are based on his copyrighted sketches and are produced through a meticulous handcrafted process. The Plaintiffs have built a strong reputation through significant marketing efforts and endorsements from celebrities. The defendant, operating under the name 'Designer Salam Studio,' is alleged to have been manufacturing and selling counterfeit garments that replicate the Plaintiffs' unique designs. The defendant has also been using the Plaintiff's mark 'GAURAV GUPTA' on social media platforms to promote their products. The Plaintiffs argued that the defendant's actions are infringing their copyrights, registered designs, and trademark rights, and have filed the present suit to protect their statutory rights.

The Court held that the defendant's actions amounted to copyright infringement under Sections 14(c) and 51 of the Copyrights Act, 1957, as he had copied 2-D drawings and transformed them into 3-D form.

1.      Infringement of Trademark 'Gaurav Gupta'

The defendant was also found to have infringed the plaintiff's trademark 'Gaurav Gupta' by using it in their advertisements. The Court held that the defendant's use of the plaintiff's registered trademark on social media channels was an attempt to take unfair advantage of the plaintiff's goodwill and reputation.

2.      Ex-Parte Ad Interim Injunction

Based on the prima facie case of the plaintiff, the Court passed an ex-parte ad interim injunction restricting the defendants from creating, advertising, and selling counterfeit goods. The defendant was also ordered to remove all videos that used the plaintiff's copyrighted material and trademark 'Gaurav Gupta' from all social media handles.

3.      Fair Use and Descriptive Use

While the defendant was not selling any garments on their YouTube channel, the Court considered whether their use of the plaintiff's mark on YouTube might be permissible under the doctrine of descriptive fair use. This doctrine, outlined in Section 30(2)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, allows the use of a mark to identify the goods or services being discussed. The Court ultimately concluded that the defendant's use of the mark on YouTube was permissible under this doctrine. However, found, that the use on Instagram and Facebook amounted to infringement.

4.      Fair Dealing and Knowledge Transfer

Although copyright infringement was not argued specifically in the context of the defendant's YouTube videos, the Court referenced the fair dealing provision in Section 52 of the Copyrights Act, 1957. While this section does not explicitly provide for exemption in cases of teaching outside classrooms, Courts have interpreted it to allow for such exemptions in certain circumstances, drawing inspiration from the decision in Hubbard v. Vosper[11]

5.      Seizure of Infringing Materials

To preserve evidence of infringement, the Court appointed a Local Commissioner to visit the defendant's premises and seize any impugned products. The Local Commissioner was tasked with conducting a search, seizure, and inventory of infringing materials.

CONCLUSION

Considering the recent judgment M/S Reflect Sculpt Private Ltd. & Anr vs Abdus Salam Khan with various erstwhile relevant judgments and the relevant statutory sections under Trademarks Act and Copyrights Act, it can be summed up that, intellectual property rights are crucial for the protection of one’s fashion design in the competitive business world. In such courses, the courts of different jurisdictions over the world, including India, have taken substantial steps to prevent the infringement of such designs or marks in order to preserve the novelty and brand value and to achieve customer safety. In the Gaurav Gupta case[12], the Delhi High court made a visionary, collaborative and progressive verdict which enables novelty of a design and catalysts the innovation. The court applied the sections 14(c) and 51 of Copyrights Act and section 30(2)(a) Trademarks Act in a way that protects the original work.