Ip Theft And Criminal Liability
Introduction to IP Theft
Intellectual Property (IP) refers to creations of the mind, such as inventions, literary and artistic works, designs, symbols, names, and images used in commerce. Common forms include:
Copyright
Trademark
Patent
Trade Secrets
IP Theft occurs when someone uses or copies protected intellectual property without permission or legal right. This includes software piracy, counterfeiting, unauthorized reproduction, trade secret theft, etc.
In many jurisdictions (including India, the US, UK), IP theft can lead to civil and criminal liability.
II. Criminal Liability in IP Theft
Criminal liability arises when the theft meets the criteria of mens rea (intent) and actus reus (act) under criminal law. Examples include:
Deliberate copyright piracy
Counterfeit trademark production
Theft of trade secrets through hacking or unauthorized access
Passing off goods deceptively as another’s
Criminal provisions are found in:
Indian Penal Code (IPC) (e.g., Sections 420, 468, 120B)
Copyright Act, 1957 (India)
Trademarks Act, 1999
Information Technology Act, 2000
U.S. Economic Espionage Act, 1996 (for U.S. cases)
III. Detailed Case Law Analysis
Below are five detailed cases (from India and international jurisdictions) showcasing IP theft and resulting criminal liability:
Case 1: Microsoft Corp. v. Kiran & Ors. (2007 Delhi HC)
Facts:
Microsoft discovered that a Delhi-based company was illegally using and distributing pirated versions of its software products. A raid found unlicensed versions installed on company systems.
Legal Issues:
Violation of Section 63 of the Copyright Act (criminal liability for infringement), along with Sections 420 and 120B IPC (cheating and conspiracy).
Judgment:
The Delhi High Court held that such actions were willful infringement. The court emphasized the need for deterrence against software piracy, upheld criminal prosecution, and recognized software as "literary work" under copyright law.
Significance:
Reinforced that corporate use of pirated software can attract criminal liability.
Set a precedent for criminal raids and FIRs in software piracy cases.
Case 2: State v. A. Ramesh and Ors. (2011, Tamil Nadu)
Facts:
An organized group was caught manufacturing and selling counterfeit branded products (Adidas, Nike) with fake trademarks.
Legal Provisions Involved:
Trademarks Act, 1999 (Sections 103, 104) for selling and applying false trademarks
Section 420 IPC for cheating
Section 63 Copyright Act
Judgment:
The accused were convicted under criminal law for intentionally deceiving consumers and infringing trademark rights. The court imposed fines and imprisonment under Sections 103 & 104 of the Trademarks Act.
Significance:
Showed how trademark infringement can result in criminal prosecution.
Sent a strong message about counterfeit goods in markets.
Case 3: United States v. Wang Dong et al. (U.S. Department of Justice, 2014)
Facts:
Five Chinese military hackers were indicted by the U.S. for stealing trade secrets from U.S. corporations (Westinghouse, U.S. Steel, Alcoa).
Provisions Involved:
Economic Espionage Act (18 U.S.C. §§ 1831–1839)
Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030)
Judgment:
Though the accused remained in China, this landmark indictment was the first time state-sponsored cyber espionage for economic gain was criminally charged.
Significance:
Recognized theft of trade secrets as criminal offense under espionage law.
Marked a new era of cyber IP theft being treated as a national security threat.
Case 4: R. K. Production v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (2012)
Facts:
The petitioner’s film was being illegally downloaded and distributed using mobile and internet services. The complaint was filed against the ISP (BSNL) and unknown offenders.
Legal Questions:
Is unauthorized digital transmission a criminal offense?
Can ISPs be held liable?
Judgment:
The court accepted that digital piracy was criminal under Section 63 of the Copyright Act. However, the ISP was not found liable without proof of complicity.
Significance:
Recognized that digital piracy via telecom networks can attract criminal investigation.
Brought focus to need for monitoring online IP theft.
Case 5: Cadbury India Ltd. v. Neeraj Food Products (2007 Delhi HC)
Facts:
Neeraj Food Products was found selling a chocolate product in packaging similar to Cadbury’s "Perk". It was a case of passing off and copyright/trademark infringement.
Legal Issues:
Trademark infringement
Copyright infringement
Violation of Sections 103 & 104 of the Trademarks Act
Judgment:
The court held that the defendant deliberately copied packaging to confuse customers and benefit from Cadbury's reputation. Criminal proceedings were initiated under relevant IP laws.
Significance:
Emphasized criminal dimensions of passing off.
Reinforced that packaging and design fall under IP protection with potential for criminal penalties.
IV. Common Criminal Provisions in Indian IP Theft Cases
| Act / Section | Offense | Punishment |
|---|---|---|
| Copyright Act, 1957 – Sec. 63 | Infringement of copyright | Imprisonment up to 3 years + fine |
| Trademarks Act, 1999 – Sec. 103 | Falsifying or falsely applying trademark | Up to 3 years + fine |
| IPC – Section 420 | Cheating | Up to 7 years + fine |
| IPC – Section 120B | Criminal conspiracy | As per main offense |
| IT Act – Section 66 | Computer-related offenses | Up to 3 years + fine |
V. Conclusion
IP theft is not just a civil wrong but a criminal offense in many cases, especially when it involves:
Willful piracy
Commercial scale counterfeiting
Cyber espionage
Deceptive packaging or branding
Courts in India and abroad have repeatedly upheld criminal prosecution in IP cases to protect creators, deter piracy, and encourage innovation. With the rise of digital platforms, enforcement is becoming more complex but also more vital.
RELATED Blog
0 comments