Back
2025 Supreme(Del) 759
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT BANSAL, J.
Dassault Systemes & Ors. - Plaintiffs
Versus
Advanced Engineering Solutions & Anr. - Defendants
CS(COMM) 378 of 2020 with I.A. 8127 of 2020
Decided on : 21-02-2025
Important Points
Subject
Intellectual Property - Copyright Infringement
Act Referred
DELHI HIGH COURT ORIGINAL SIDE RULES: R.3
DELHI HIGH COURT INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS DIVISION RULES: R.20
Headnote
(B) Copyright Infringement - Requirement of valid licensing agreements emphasized - Plaintiffs utilized technology to monitor software usage - Defendants failed to provide evidence of legitimate licenses. (Paras 10, 19, 34)
Facts of the case:
Plaintiffs are leading software developers informing of unauthorized use of their programs by Defendants, confirmed by detailed infringement data. (Paras 3, 9)
Findings of Court:
Clear case of copyright infringement established; defendants took unfair advantage of the plaintiffs' software. (Paras 33, 41)
Issues: Whether the defendants infringed copyright; whether plaintiffs are entitled to damages and injunction.
Ratio Decidendi: Defendants’ consistent failure to respond and provide evidence of licensing constituted infringement; plaintiffs’ extensive documentation supports their claims. (Paras 32, 36)
Result: Permanent injunction granted, damages awarded Rs. 2,78,34,320/- to plaintiffs, costs awarded Rs. 3,21,000/-.
For the Plaintiffs :Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Shantanu Sahay, Ms. Shreya Shukla and Ms. Vareesha Irfan, Advocates.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the plaintiffs’ software and copyright. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. circumstances leading to the defendants' copyright infringement. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. analysis of defendants' conduct and plaintiffs' claims. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 4. legal findings on copyright ownership and infringement. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 5. determination of damages and compensation. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 6. final relief and court orders issued. (Para 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
JUDGMENT :
AMIT BANSAL, J.
1. The present suit has been filed seeking relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the copyright of the plaintiffs, along with other ancillary reliefs.
CASE SET UP BY THE PLAINTIFFS
2. The plaintiffs in the present suit are, Dassault Systèmes (plaintiff no. 1), a French corporation; Dassault Systèmes SolidWorks Corporation (plaintiff no. 2), a U.S.-based company; and plaintiff no. 3, Dassault Systemes India Private Limited, wholly-owned subsidiary of the plaintiff no. 1 and sister concern of the plaintiff no. 2. The plaintiff no. 3 was set up to carry out business activities and anti-piracy campaigns in India. (hereinafter, collectively referred to as ‘the plaintiffs’).
3. The software programs created by the plaintiffs are widely known for developing 3D simulation Computer-Aided Design (CAD), Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM), and Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE). These software programs bring the entire process of designing, innovating, and manufacturing a product onto a computer system. They are used across various industries such as aviation, defence, mining, automotive, and consumer products etc.
4. Plaintiff no. 2 was created to manage all business and legal matters related to its ‘SOLIDWORKS’ software, including managing the software's Intellectual Property Rights. ‘SOLIDWORKS’ is a computer-aided design software used for modelling and simulating three-dimensional solid products. The plaintiff no.2 is the owner of the said software program.
5. In addition to the aforementioned software, the plaintiffs have developed two other software programs ‘CATIA’ and ‘SIMULIA’, which are also the subject matter of the present suit. ‘CATIA’ is a 3D modelling and design software that allows the user to model the products in a manner which would simulate its use in the real word. ‘SIMULIA’ is a Multiphysics modelling software that simulates the reliability, performance and safety of the products. The plaintiff no.1 is the owner of the aforesaid software programs. The copyright registration certificates of the plaintiffs in respect of the software programs ‘CATIA’ and ‘SOLIDWORKS’ have been exhibited as Ex - PW 1/6
6. The plaintiffs operate on a licensing system, where customers acquire the right to use the software and not ownership. Software is licensed through internet delivery, with customers agreeing to an End-User License Agreement (“EULA”) or Customer License and Online Services Agreement (“CLOSA”) before installation. After the terms are accepted, the plaintiffs send a license key to the customer's registered email for installation. Any entity using the software must be able to provide evidence of legitimate payment and the correct number of licenses for the software installed or in use. The plaintiffs maintain a regularly updated database of all valid licensees, and any use of the software beyond the terms of the EULA/CLOSA constitutes a breach of contractual and intellectual property rights.
7. The plaintiffs after suffering losses due to piracy, implemented "phone home" technology in their software to detect misuse and ensure compliance with the EULA and CLOSA. This system captures usage data from the user's computer and sends it to the plaintiffs' servers for verification. If the software is used with an unauthorized license, it logs an "infringement hit" tracking unauthorized use. The plaintiffs can identify infringin
