(1) THESE applications are filed seeking ad interim injunction restraining the respondents from infringing of copyrights and from passing off their "phone Validation Services" as that of the plaintiffs service.

(2) THE applicants/plaintiffs have contended in their applications that the applicant, who is a pioneer for matrimonial alliance, created a system "assured Contact -Phone Verification Service" through its employees during the course of employment. The applicant/plaintiff has become the owner and proprietor of the copyright in the system

which is inbuilt in the applicants website. The applicant spent several lakhs of rupees in developing and implementing the unique feature. "assured Contact-Phone verification Services". The unique feature has become synonymous with the applicants website Bharat Matrimony. com. The respondents website is a direct competitor of the applicants website under the name "my Contact Details". The respondent is offering the very same identical feature to the customers. The same step by step procedure is adopted by the respondent in its website, slavishly imitating the applicants unique feature. The respondent cannot lavishly copy the features of the applicant which was invented and conceptualised-by it. The respondent is misleading the members of the public utilising the aforesaid unique feature in the course of its trade. The applicant has suffered irreparable loss and damage to its business on account of the wrongful activity of the respondent. The applicant is the first owner of the copyright in the Computer programme for their unique service. Therefore, the applicant has sought for the aforesaid reliefs.

(3) THE respondent has contended that the applicants "assured Contact-Phone verification Services" does not fall within the defined category of protected work under the copyright Act. The copyright protection does not extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, invention of discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, illustrated or embodied. The applicant failed to identify the particular employee who purportedly created the "assured Contract-Phone verification Service". No affidavit was filed by the employee, who allegedly invented, to show prima facie the authorship of the system. service. Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system is nothing but a system where a user hears a recorded voice after dialing a particular number and presses an appropriate button in accordance with the instructions provided by the recorded voice. Many corporates are broadly using the IVR system. The collection of personal information of person seeking to become a member of a website is not either innovative or an improvement of customer friendliness. This is just a matter of common sense and is a standard practice of all website and online service providers. Therefore, the respondent has sought for dismissal of the aforesaid applications.

(4) LEARNED Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the respondent, who has hijacked the core idea of the system development using the

Interactive Voice Response, has set up an identical platform causing huge loss to the business of the applicant. The copyrights of the mark illustrated has been utilised by the respondent having given a go-by to their outmoded system with some cosmetic changes to the "assured Contact-Phone Verification System". Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the slavish imitation of the system invented by the applicant is an infringement of the copyright acquired by the applicant investing so much of money on its employees. Therefore, he would submit that the applicant is entitled to the relief as sought for.

(5) MRS. Nalini Chidambaram, learned Senior counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that no idea or concept can be copyrighted. There is no uniqueness in the procedure adopted by the applicant. The corporate Se