Restraint on Canva’s Infringing ‘Present and Record’ Feature Upheld

In the matter of Rxprism Health Systems Private Limited & Anr. V. Canva Pty. Ltd. & Ors., the Delhi High Court has upheld the single judge’s finding in July 2023 that Canva’s ‘Present and Record’ feature infringed Rxprism’s patent, and the restraint on making it available continues.

Rxprism, a startup providing technology products for social selling and social commerce to business organisations, and owner of Indian Patent No. ‘IN360726’ titled “A system and a method for creating and sharing interactive content rapidly anywhere and anytime,” had alleged that Canva, an Australian online design and content-creation platform, had commercially exploited the impugned ‘Present and Record’ feature in India without obtaining a license.

Considering the fact that an appeal against an order granting or refusing an injunction is not an appeal on facts but an appeal on principle, the court rejected Canva’s contention that the impugned judgment suffered from the absence of proper claim construction. The court found that a detailed claim mapping exercise had been undertaken.

Further, Canva’s assertion that its product lacked the “third layer” or a “sandwiched layer,” unlike Rxprism’s patent, was rejected since it was not part of the specification or claim construction. The same was earlier rejected by the single-judge bench holding that “mere non-existence of a sandwich layer would not obviate infringement” on the ground that the functionality of both products is “almost identical.”

Moreover, the court observed that any interface that enabled a user to add one or more Call to Action (CTA) buttons at a specific place or position within interactive content qualified as a “configuration interface” and satisfied the requirements of infringing Rxprism’s patent, which Canva’s product did.

In addition, the court found no infirmity in the direction requiring Canva to deposit a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs, as it was founded on relevant considerations, including the extent of usage of the infringing feature in India, the revenue generated therefrom, the absence of attachable assets within the jurisdiction, and the need to secure the Rxprism’s claims in the event the suit ultimately succeeds.