Copyright Protection of Fashion Sketches vs. Finished Garments Under Indian Law

Authored By: Tharunika. S

Vel Tech University, School of Law

ABSTRACT:

The fashion industry relies heavily on creativity and original designs, making a intellectual property protection as an a important concern .in India, Intellectual property rights provides protect the legal rights from the creator and innovators from having their original works, invention or brands copied without permission .whereas in the topic of copyright protection of fashion sketches, the copyright law provides protection to artistic works such as fashion sketches and drawings under Copyright act 1957 . where the finished garments will be under the Design Act 2000.

KEY WORDS

Fashion Industry, Intellectual Property, Legal Rights, Fashion Sketches, Drawings , Copyright Act 1957,Design Act 2000

INTRODUCTION

Intellectual property rights have played a major role in the scope of the fashion industry. As intellectual property protection is a form of the foundation for preserving originality , creativity, and commercial value .In absence of adequate legal protection,the fashion industry would struggle to thrive and sustain its economic and creative development.

Fashion Industry as we know is one of the most glamorous industries in India, generating revenue of INR 12,546 million in 2019 .¹ Several fashion events like the Lakme fashion week, India Fashion Week, India Runway week etc are conducted every year across different cities in the country. These events provide a platform for designers to showcase their creative talent, attract media attention and build awareness around their brand.²

Intellectual Property Rights in relation to the fashion industry bestows on the designer’s protection in the form of:-

Patents for innovations
Copyright for creativity and artistic work
Trademarks for protection of brand or logo
Designs for protection to designs that are new and original
Geographical indications (GI) to distinguish products that have specific geographical origins and possess qualities or a reputation that are closely associated with their place of origin.
Trade Secrets for the protection of such information of enterprises from its competitors which, if disclosed in the market would result in unfair advantage to the competitors.

Of the above, trademarks, copyrights and designs are most widely used by designers to protect their work.³

BACKGROUND

DEFENITION

A fashion sketch is a preliminary drawing that visualizes a designer’s concept for a garment, serving as a blueprint for production.The drawings and sketches of a garment or accessory are considered artistic works and are protected by copyright. The designer holds exclusive rights over the use and reproduction of these sketches.

the Copyright Act, 1957, which protects original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, including fashion designs that can be classified as artistic works. Copyright offers exclusive rights to the creator to reproduce, distribute, and display the work, thereby protecting their creations from unauthorised use.

Under the preview of law “fashion design” refers specifically to the visual and decorative aspects of items such as apparel, fabrics, shoes, and accessories. These elements are legally separated from functional components, which are not eligible for copyright due to their practical purpose. According to Section 2(d) of the Designs Act, 2000, a protectable “design” involves the visual characteristics—like shape, pattern, or color arrangement—applied to a product through manufacturing, provided these traits are judged exclusively by their visual appeal in the final item.

The Copyright Act of 1957 offers an alternative framework. Under Section 2(c), an “artistic work” is defined to encompass not only traditional forms like paintings and sculptures but also extends to “any other work of artistic craftsmanship.”

Statutory analysis

This section is from the copyright act 1957 section-15. Special provision regarding Copyright in designs registered or capable of being registered under the 3[***] 4[Designs Act, 2000 (16 of 2000)].— (1) Copyright shall not subsist under this Act in any design which is registered under the 3[***] 4[Designs Act, 2000 (16 of 2000)]. (2) Copyright in any design, which is capable of being registered under the 3[***] 4[Designs Act, 2000 (16 of 2000)] but which has not been so registered, shall cease 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, by any other person.

This section is from the designs act 2000 section-4. Prohibition of registration of certain designs.—A design which— (a) is not new or original; or (b) has been disclosed to the public anywhere in India or in any other country by publication in tangible form or by use or in any other way prior to the filing date, or where applicable, the priority date of the application for registration; or (c) is not significantly distinguishable from known designs or combination of known designs; or (d) comprises or contains scandalous or obscene matter, shall not be registered.

Section 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957 provides the meaning of the copyright, it clearly defines which are the fields in which copyright will be applicable and Section 54 of the Copyright Act, 1957 defines the “owner of the copyright”.

Design is another important term when we talk about apparels. The Design Act, 2000 protects not the ultimate product but the design, shape or pattern of it. For instance, a sketch of a dress. Registration of a design is important to seek protection under the law. However, the conflict between registering a design under the Copyright Act or the Design Act has been prevalent

With these, the inclusion of copyright artistic ,copyright originality, copyright in drawing copyright in design, trade secret is also playing its part in these as far with the fashion sketches and finished garment

CASE ANAYSIS

IN the case of RITIKA PRIVATE LIMITED VS BIBA APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED -23/03/2016

FACTS

Filed the suit claiming a copyright in various drawing and sketches, which are created by the plaintiff sold under the trade name /brand “Rithu Kumar” .it was pleaded that drawing and sketches are distinctive, exclusive and identifiable with the brand rithu kumar he enjoys goodwill and reputation. Plaint creative process is summarized as follows

A drawing/sketch created by the Mrs. rithu kumar and or other designs employed by the plaintiff the same is an original durative artistic work
The drawing is put in digital form and completed on a computer assigning colors the same is independently a derivate artistic work

ISSUES

a) Whether the sketches and drawing created by the plaintiff

Constituted original autistic works portended under the copyright act 1957?

b) Whether the defendant had infringed the plaintiffs copy right by reproducing or substantially limiting the plaintiff’s designs on garments?

c) whether the plaintiff would lose copyright protection in its sketches, drawing, and the design once they were applied to garment and reproduce commercially beyond fifty copied as they were capable of registration under the designs act 2000 but had not been so registered?

JUDGMENTS

The court held that although the plaintiff’s sketches and drawing were original artistic worse protected under the copyright act, 1957, such copyright protection ceased once those designs were applied to garment through an industrial process and reproduce commercially beyond fifty copies. Since the designs were capable of registration under the design act 2000 and not been registered section 15(2) of the copyright act barred the plaintiff from claiming copyright protection. the court further observed that the defendant had not merely reproduced the plaintiffs copyrighted artistic works; rather it had independently created garments using similar designs concept .therefore ,there was no infringement of copyright under the copyright act 1957.regarding the allegation of trade secret ,the court found that the plaintiff had failed identify the alleged trade secrets or establishes how they were confidential consequently no injunction could be granted on the basis of vague and unspecified claims of trade secret violation accordingly the court refused to grant the relies sought by the plaintiffs and held in favor of the defendant

CONCLUSION

The Indian legal framework governing intellectual property protection for fashion designs reflects a carefully structured yet complex dual system that seeks to balance artistic creativity with commercial utility. Copyright law under the Copyright Act, 1957, extends automatic protection to original fashion sketches and artistic illustrations, recognising the designer’s intellectual labour and creative expression from the moment of creation. However, this protection encounters significant limitations once the artistic work transitions into an industrially reproduced garment, at which point the Designs Act, 2000, emerges as the more relevant and effective legal instrument.

This legislative distinction is not incidental but deliberate, reflecting Parliament’s intent to prevent the perpetual monopolisation of commercially applied designs while simultaneously encouraging genuine artistic innovation. Judicial precedents have consistently reinforced this demarcation, requiring designers to adopt a strategic and informed approach when selecting the appropriate mode of intellectual property protection at each stage of their creative process. Neglecting design registration prior to mass production can result in irreversible forfeiture of exclusive rights, leaving designers commercially vulnerable.For fashion designers, brands, and industry stakeholders, a thorough understanding of this dual framework is not merely academic but practically indispensable. As India’s fashion industry continues its rapid global ascent, proactive intellectual property strategies will prove essential in safeguarding originality, securing investments, and deterring infringement. Strengthening legal awareness, simplifying registration procedures, and fostering judicial clarity in this domain will collectively contribute to a more robust, equitable, and innovation-driven fashion ecosystem in India.

REFRENCE(S):