The title of a work is its name. It's no more. In principle, the work is protected by copyright; But his title, alone and abandoned, failed.
A good title is descriptive.
A good title hooks.
A bad title may, by loose, make the work lose sense or do it justice.
There are hundreds of songs with the same name (eg "Oh Love"). We have all composed (intentionally or unintentionally) a song with a title that someone else had already used.
But is there plagiarism? Can you claim me for baptizing another song under the title "My Love"?
No. If ideas are not protected, the title is almost an idea. What is important is the body of the work. Its development. Where does the author take that title, or why did it end there?
There are notorious cases of great titles. That alone could be considered sufficient originality or works to be protected individually (and in conjunction with the work). All the novels of Gabriel García Márquez are part of the list of great titles. But it would be a long and disputed fight.
I think to be for a matter of harnessing that plagiarism reputation of others.
If you have to put a title, it is fine if it has meat, if it is original; But if in the end you are going to give the world another "Our love", then,
5 titles that take it out of the stadium:
- Love in the Time of Cholera (Gabriel García Márquez)
- Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Charlie Kaufman et. Al.)
- Lemon Tiramisu (Joaquín Sabina)
- The love of the fireflies (Alejandro Ricaño)
- Your house on the corner of time (The Ear of Van Gogh)