Mumbai University Solved Question Papers
Law of Industrial Designs GI Layout Designs Data Protection and Trade Secrets
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
LLM · Group 3 Law of Intellectual Property and Information Technology
2016 Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
First published on munotes.in on 14 September 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 2016 examination.
The law in these answers is stated as at September 2026, and four changes date most textbooks on this subject. The Intellectual Property Appellate Board was abolished with effect from 4 April 2021, so appeals under the Geographical Indications Act now lie to the High Court, while the Layout-Design Appellate Board was never constituted and its sections, like the provision naming that Board as a stand-in, were never brought into force, so that Act has no appellate body at all. Since 1 August 2024 falsely representing a geographical indication as registered has been a penalty imposed by an officer of the Registry rather than an offence. India acceded to the Locarno Agreement with effect from 7 September 2019. And the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 commences in stages, its main duties applying from 13 May 2027.
The questions below are the paper as the University of Mumbai set it at the 2016 examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2016 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 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 7 questions answered
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.
Answer
For full marks, cover: three questions. First, EXPLAIN section 2(d) element by element, including its five exclusions, with Bharat Glass Tube on the eye test. Second, explain COPYRIGHT IN DESIGN: section 2(c), how it arises only on registration, its term and its class limit. Third, DISTINGUISH it from ordinary copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957 in a table, and finish with section 15 of the Copyright Act, where the two regimes meet, using Rajesh Masrani, Microfibres and Cryogas.
The definition. "Design" means only the features of shape, configuration, pattern, ornament or composition of lines or colours applied to any article, whether in two dimensional or three dimensional or in both forms, by any industrial process or means, whether manual, mechanical or chemical, separate or combined, which in the finished article appeal to and are judged solely by the eye. It does not include any mode or principle of construction, anything which is in substance a mere mechanical device, any trade mark, any property mark, or any artistic work under section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957.
Element one: "only the features" of five kinds. The list is exhaustive. SHAPE is the outline or form of the article, such as the contour of a bottle. CONFIGURATION is the arrangement of its parts in three dimensions, such as the layout of a washing machine's panels. PATTERN and ORNAMENT are applied surface decoration, such as a print on fabric or embossing on glass. COMPOSITION OF LINES OR COLOURS, added in 2000, covers arrangements of lines or colour on a surface.
Element two: applied to an article. A design does not exist in the abstract; it must be applied to an article. Section 2(a) defines "article" as any article of manufacture and any substance, artificial or partly artificial and partly natural, and includes any part of an article capable of being made and sold separately, which brings in spare parts such as a car's headlamp.
Element three: two or three dimensions. The words "whether in two dimensional or three dimensional or in both forms" make clear that a surface pattern and a shape are equally designs, and a design may combine both.
Element four: an industrial process or means. The features must be applied by an industrial process or means, whether manual, mechanical or chemical, separate or combined. This is what separates a design, made to be reproduced in quantity, from a one-off work of art.
Element five: appeal to the eye in the finished article. The features must, in the finished article, appeal to and be judged solely by the eye. In Bharat Glass Tube Ltd. v. Gopal Glass Works Ltd., (2008) 10 SCC 657, a pattern registered for figured glass sheets was challenged on the strength of a German company's catalogue of engraving rollers. The Supreme Court upheld the registration: what is protected is a feature applied to a finished article, and it is the appearance of the FINISHED GLASS SHEET that must be compared, by the eye, not a roller or a drawing.
The exclusions. A MODE OR PRINCIPLE OF CONSTRUCTION, and anything that is in substance a MERE MECHANICAL DEVICE, are excluded because the Designs Act protects appearance, not function; functional features belong, if anywhere, to patent law. TRADE MARKS and PROPERTY MARKS are excluded because they protect origin and ownership. ARTISTIC WORKS are excluded because the Copyright Act already protects them.
The functional exclusion at work. In Crocs Inc. USA v. Bata India Ltd. (Delhi High Court, Division Bench, 24 January 2019), the defendants argued that the holes and heel strap of Crocs' clogs were functional. The Division Bench observed that footwear has little "play" for design because it must fit the foot, and that a mere trade variation of an age-old design is not protectable; it declined to interfere with the refusal of interim injunctions, principally because the designs had been published before their priority date.
The artistic work exclusion at work. In Rajesh Masrani v. Tahiliani Design Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2009 Delhi 44 (DB), Tarun Tahiliani's couture prints and embroidered patterns, created by his designers on computer and made in not more than twenty pieces per costume, were copied by a printer. The Division Bench held that they were artistic works under section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, excluded from the definition of design, and so protected by copyright without any registration under the Designs Act.
The definition, section 2(c) of the Designs Act. "Copyright" means the exclusive right to apply a design to any article in any class in which the design is registered. The Designs Act borrows the word, but the right it describes is not copyright in the sense of the Copyright Act; it is a registered monopoly over the application of a design to articles.
It arises only on registration. No design right exists until the Controller registers the design under section 5. Registration takes effect from the date of the application under section 5(6), and section 11(1) gives the registered proprietor copyright in the design for TEN YEARS from that date. Under section 11(2) it may be extended for a SECOND PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS on an application made before the ten years expire.
It is confined to a class. A design is registered in not more than one class under section 5(3), in respect of articles in a class prescribed by the Rules under section 6, and the exclusive right in section 2(c) extends only to articles in that class. The same pattern registered for glass sheets gives no right against its use on bedsheets.
How it is enforced. Section 22 makes it unlawful, while the copyright subsists, to apply the design or any fraudulent or obvious imitation of it to an article in the registered class for sale, to import such articles for sale, or knowingly to publish or expose them for sale. The proprietor may recover up to twenty-five thousand rupees per contravention, subject to fifty thousand rupees for any one design, or sue for damages and an injunction.
Its incidents. The proprietor must mark articles as registered before delivery on sale, or lose damages against an innocent infringer (section 15); assignments and licences must be in writing and registered (section 30); a lapsed design may be restored within a year (sections 12 to 14); and the registration may be cancelled at any time on the grounds in section 19.
| Point | Copyright in a registered design | Ordinary copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957 |
|---|---|---|
| Source | registration under the Designs Act, 2000 | arises automatically when an original work is created |
| Subject matter | features of appearance applied to an article by an industrial process | literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, films and sound recordings |
| Threshold | new or original, not disclosed anywhere, significantly distinguishable (section 4) | originality only, no novelty requirement |
| Formality | registration is essential | registration is optional (Rajesh Masrani) |
| Scope | exclusive right to apply the design to articles in the registered class | exclusive rights to reproduce, adapt and communicate the work, in any material form |
| Class limit | confined to the registered class | not tied to any class of goods |
| Term | ten years, extendable once by five (section 11) | for an artistic work, the author's life plus sixty years |
| Point | Copyright in a registered design | Ordinary copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957 |
|---|---|---|
| Infringement | applying the design or a fraudulent or obvious imitation, importing, knowingly selling (section 22) | reproducing the work or a substantial part of it |
| Independent creation | no statutory exception for it | no infringement without copying |
| Remedies | limited statutory sums or damages and injunction; no offence | civil remedies and criminal prosecution |
| Loss of right | cancellation under section 19, or lapse for non-renewal | no registration to cancel; the right ends with its term |
The practical difference. A registered design gives a stronger but narrower and shorter right: stronger because it is a monopoly that does not depend on proving copying, narrower because it is confined to one class of articles and to appearance, and shorter because it lasts fifteen years at most. Ordinary copyright is broad and long but protects only against copying of a work.
The statutory bridge. Section 15(1) of the Copyright Act provides that copyright does not subsist under that Act in any design registered under the Designs Act. Section 15(2) provides that copyright in a design capable of registration but not registered ceases as soon as any article to which the design has been applied has been reproduced more than fifty times by an industrial process by the owner of the copyright or with his licence.
The Delhi High Court's harmonisation. In Microfibres Inc. v. Girdhar & Co., 2009 (40) PTC 519 (Del) (DB), a maker of upholstery fabrics sued on copyright in its fabric patterns rather than on design registrations. The Division Bench held that the original drawing or painting keeps full copyright; a registered design loses copyright protection altogether; and a registrable but unregistered design keeps copyright only until the article has been industrially reproduced more than fifty times. Commercial design activity was meant to receive lesser protection than pure art.
The Supreme Court's two-pronged test. In Cryogas Equipment Private Limited v. Inox India Limited, 2025 INSC 483, decided on 15 April 2025, Inox sued for copyright in engineering drawings for the inner parts of LNG semi-trailers, and the defendants sought rejection of the plaint because the drawings were unregistered designs reproduced far more than fifty times. The Supreme Court dismissed their appeals and sent the case to trial, laying down a two-pronged test: first, whether the work is purely an artistic work or a design derived from it and subjected to an industrial process within section 15(2); and second, if it does not qualify for copyright, whether by the test of functional utility its dominant purpose makes it a design protectable under the Designs Act.
Conclusion. A "design" under section 2(d) is only the features of shape, configuration, pattern, ornament or composition of lines or colours applied to an article by an industrial process which, in the finished article, appeal to and are judged solely by the eye, excluding functional constructions, mechanical devices, trade marks, property marks and artistic works, as Bharat Glass Tube and Rajesh Masrani show. "Copyright in design" under section 2(c) is the exclusive right to apply the design to articles in the registered class, created only by registration and lasting ten years plus five under section 11. It differs from ordinary copyright in source, subject, threshold, scope, term, infringement and remedies, and the two are reconciled by section 15 of the Copyright Act, which removes copyright from registered designs and from unregistered designs industrially reproduced more than fifty times, applied through the two-pronged test of Cryogas (2025).
The rest of the answers
You have read the paper as it was set and the first model answer in full. The remaining answers come with the bundle, along with every other solved paper for this semester.
See the semester for ₹798 Already bought it? Sign in
Or just the solved papers: ₹499
The question paper itself stays free, as does the syllabus and module one of every subject.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.
