The Delhi High Court has issued an ex-parte interim injunction, restricting the unauthorised use of any intellectual property related to the iconic Hindi film Andaz Apna Apna.
This includes characters, dialogues, images, audio-visual content, and AI-generated material associated with the 1994 cult classic.
Lawsuit Filed By Vinay Pictures
The court’s order came in response to a lawsuit filed by Vinay Pictures, the production house behind Andaz Apna Apna, which sought protection against widespread copyright and trademark infringement. The complaint detailed how various parties were allegedly misusing the film’s intellectual property for commercial purposes across digital platforms and merchandise.
Justice Amit Bansal, who passed the order on May 14, noted that the plaintiff had made a strong initial case and highlighted the potential for “irreparable loss” if immediate relief was not granted.
Ban On Unauthorized Content
The High Court order restrains several known and unknown individuals from:
- Hosting or streaming the film,
- Making it available for download,
Creating or sharing any derivative content—whether visual, audio, or AI-generated—that is based on Andaz Apna Apna.
The injunction explicitly prohibits the use of the film’s elements in any form without authorization.
Directions To YouTube & Google
The court also directed Google LLC, the parent company of YouTube, to remove or disable all infringing videos, YouTube Shorts, and any other content that violates the plaintiff’s intellectual property rights.
Cult Status & IP Ownership
Vinay Pictures emphasized in its plea that the film, which was re-released this year, continues to enjoy “enduring popularity and cultural relevance.” The production house asserted exclusive rights over the movie’s title, characters—including “Amar”, “Prem”, “Teja”, and “Crime Master Gogo”—as well as the literary and dramatic elements of the film.
It further claimed ownership over registered trademarks like the iconic catchphrases “Aila” and “Ouima,” stating these phrases had “acquired secondary meaning in the minds of the public.”
Commercial Exploitation Without Permission
The lawsuit alleged that third parties were illegally profiting from the film’s popularity by selling unlicensed merchandise such as T-shirts, mugs, posters, and notebooks. Additionally, AI-generated digital content, video clips, and social media posts referencing the film were being circulated without authorization.
Vinay Pictures argued that it holds the legal right to commercialize all aspects of the film’s intellectual property and has signed licensing agreements with official partners to market such merchandise.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
