Ideas are human conceptions that have been represented. They are not abstract conceptions that exist independently waiting to be thought. The process of thinking of an idea involves giving it expression. Therefore, ideas are human conceptions and cannot exist independently of a way of conceptualizing i.e. essentially the expression. An idea is the substance of a writing whereas the expression is the form. The substance shapes the form and the form shapes the substance. Hence both cannot exist independently and have a complementary relationship. In essence what is implied is that there are no expressionless ideas. Therefore ideas never exist independently of an expression since the only way to conceptualize an idea is an expression. Though law creates a fictionary line between ideas and expression but in essence there can be no unexpressionless ideas  . Law in essences views ideas as abstractions or generalities and therefore distinct from expressions which are fixed in a medium  . Though there have been many judicial pronouncements upon the existence of the dichotomy, but yet none of the courts have coherently put forth the definition and scope of “idea” or “expression” or the demarcating line between the two  . The dichotomy has been signified in many cases as “ideas behind expressions  ” or “underlying ideas  “, but have neither gone onto clearly distinguishing the difference nor provided conceptual clarity with respect to the terms. Furthermore, the variety of terminologies that have been used seeks to provide a lack of clarity in this field.