Mumbai University Solved Question Papers
Intellectual Property Laws
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
BLS LLB 5 Years · Sem 10
Oct 2025 - 75/25 Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
BLS LLB 5 Years Sem 10 Intellectual Property Laws Oct 2025 - 75/25 Question Paper with Solutions
Get access to whole semester resourcesSemester Pass
MU law student group
Free to join
First published on munotes.in on 24 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of the University of Mumbai. It is not affiliated with the University of Mumbai, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by the University of Mumbai at the Oct 2025 - 75/25 examination.
The answers in this volume state the law as it stands today, not as it stood when the paper was set. The Intellectual Property Appellate Board was abolished on 4 April 2021 by the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, so patent revocation petitions and appeals from the Controller and the Registrar now lie to the High Court, and the Copyright Board's work, including tariff appeals, lies with the Commercial Court. Since 1 August 2024 the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023 has turned several trade mark and patent offences into penalties imposed by an adjudicating officer, and the 2026 Act omitted section 119 of the Patents Act from 1 June 2026. Medicines and chemicals have had product patents only since 1 January 2005, and every patent alive on 20 May 2003 runs twenty years from filing. The Supreme Court reversed the Madras ruling in Khoday Distilleries on 27 May 2008. Copyright cases decided before 2012 cite section 52 by its old letters.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as the University of Mumbai set it at the Oct 2025 - 75/25 examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the Oct 2025 - 75/25 examination, reproduced as the University of Mumbai set them, in the order it set them. Nothing has been reworded, added or left out. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 2½ hours · Total marks 75 · 21 questions answered
Instructions printed on the paper
- N.B: 1. All questions are compulsory. 2. Figures to the right indicate full marks.
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q.1
Q.1: Answer in not more than two sentences
Any six · (12 Marks)
(a)Define the term Musical Work as per the Copyright Act, 1957.[2]
Answer
Definition. Section 2(p) of the Copyright Act, 1957 says: "'musical work' means a work consisting of music and includes any graphical notation of such work but does not include any words or any action intended to be sung, spoken or performed with the music".
What this means.
- Music alone. The musical work is the melody and harmony, the tune itself.
- Notation not needed. It "includes" the written notation, but the music is protected even if it was never written down.
- Words are separate. The lyrics of a song are a literary work, and any dance with it may be a dramatic work. Each has its own copyright and may have a different owner.
Author and term. The author of a musical work is its composer (section 2(d)(ii)). Copyright lasts for his life plus sixty years (section 22).
Case. In Sulamangalam R. Jayalakshmi v. Meta Musicals, AIR 2000 Mad 454, the plaintiffs claimed copyright in the music of two devotional songs. They were Kandha Sashti Kavacham and Kandha Guru Kavacham. The Madras High Court granted an interim injunction. It held prima facie that the music of both songs was a musical work in copyright. The words of the second were also a literary work. One recorded song can carry separate copyrights in its music, its words and the recording.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the B.L.S. LL.B. 5 Years Semester 10 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Notes + Solved papers: ₹798 Already bought it? Sign in
Or solved papers only: ₹499
Or notes only: ₹499
The question paper itself stays free, and so does the syllabus.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.