UNIT-I: THE COPYRIGHTS (INDIAN COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957)

a. Introduction to Copyright Law (Refer the link for tracing the development in English law)
b. Brief Introduction to related International Treaties and Conventions
c. Subject Matter of Copyright, Economic and Moral Rights (ss2,13,14,15,16, 57)
d. Authorship and Ownership (s17), Term of Copyright and Assignment-Licensing (ss18-31)
e. Infringement and Remedies (ss50-61)
f. Exceptions: Fair Dealing
g. International Copyright Order (ss40-41)
h. Issues in Digital Copyrights

a. Introduction to Copyright Law

EVOLUTION OF COPYRIGHT LAW IN INDIA

Pre-Independence Copyright law in India
➔ The Copyright Law of India was enacted by the British colony and like most of the acts of that
time; it was an imitation of the English law.
➔ The first copyright act of India was enacted in 1847, during the regime of East India Company. As
per the act, the term of copyright was either, for the lifetime of author plus 7 years or 42 years.
The government had the power to grant the publishing licence after the death of the author
if the owner of the copyright refused permission. All suits and infringement related to copyright
came under the jurisdiction of the highest local civil court. The act was replaced by the copyright
act of 1914.
➔ The act of 1914 was the first 'modern' copyright law of India. It was the first law to include all
works of art and literature under the ambit of copyright. It was a replica of the English law of
1911. It was done by the British to ease the passage of literature over the colonial subcontinent.

Post-Independence Copyright law in India

➔ The Copyright Act of 1957 came into force on the 21st of January, 1958 replacing the 1911 act.
The act besides amending the copyright law also introduced milestone changes such as provisions
for setting up a copyright office under the control of Registrar of copyright for registration of
books and other works of art. It also established a copyright board to deal with the disputes
relating to copyright.

Objective and Principles:

The objective of this copyright law is mainly twofold:
➔ Economic/Exclusive Rights: first to assure authors, composers, artists, designers and other
creative people, who risk their capital in putting their works before the public, the right of their
original expression
➔ Moral Rights: The author has the right to claim authorship over the work and the right to
prevent any injury or mutation to his intellectual property.
➔ Public Interest: second to encourage others to build freely upon the ideas and information
conveyed by a work.
➔ Doctrine of fair use (or fair dealing): a legal doctrine which permits a person to use any work
which is protected under the Act with limited usage of such work so as to maintain the sanctity
and originality of such work as well as the registered proprietor of the work.
In Eastern Book Co. v. D.B. Modak (2008) 1 SCC 1 it was stated that
➔ Copyright is a right to stop others from exploiting the work without the assent of the owner of the
copyright.
➔ Originality has a direct nexus in maintaining the intent and interest of the author.
➔ Copyright law is not related to facts per se but rather the commercial viability, consequences and
implications.
____
Idea-Expression Dichotomy

Case Laws:
Name Principle(s) as laid down:

R.G. Anand v. Delux Films & Ors. Facts:

AIR 1978 SC 1613 - ‘Hum Hindustani’ was a play written by Mr. R.G.
Anand, the appellant, and an architect by profession, in
1953.
- The respondent, a film producing company, somehow
came to know of the appellant’s intent to make a film
and approached him to take things forward in this
respect. However, even after a brief discussion in 1955,
the respondent did not revert to the appellant on the
same.
- Respondent was making a film titled ‘New Delhi’,
which the appellant believed was an imitation of his
famous play Hum Hindustani.

Provisions:
1. Section-1(2)(d) of the Copyright Act, 1911: states that
copyright means the right to produce, deliver, perform
or publish the work or any part of it in public. Sub-
clause(d) provides it in the case of any literary,
dramatic, or musical work to make any record,
perforated roll, cinematographic film, or other
contrivance through which the work may be
mechanically performed or delivered.
2. Section-2 of the Copyright Act, 1911: It lays down
several grounds that cause the breach of copyright.

Held: The Supreme Court stated that even though the film and
the play had a foundation based on the idea of provincialism,
similarities were negligible. Both of them were very different
in their context. There were various plots in the film that were
not present in the play. The apex court also stated that an
ordinary man would not scan any similarity between the two.
Thus, it was held that there was no breach of the appellant’s
copyright. The Supreme Court accordingly rejected the
appellant’s plea, upholding the Trial Court and the Delhi High
Court’s decision.

[Before Syed Murtaza Fazalali, Jaswant Singh, R.S. Pathak,

4JJ]
 Anil Gupta & Anr. v. Kunal The plaintiff came up with an idea for a reality show with a
Dasgupta & Ors. 2002 (25) PTC 1 match making theme where women would pick their groom
(Del) from men who were in the show as suitors. The show was
named Swayamwar. Plaintiff provided a concept note of the
same to the Defendant and later developed a structure and
format for easy implementation. But the negotiations failed.
The Defendants launched a soon after named Shubh Vivah.
Issue was whether the latter infringed the copyright of the
former. The Plaintiff was granted the interim injunction he
sought. This case has been used by researchers to indicate the
interpretation of certain High Courts that a well defined or
detailed idea can become an expression.

[Before Virendra Jain, J.]

Donoghue v. Allied Newspapers In this case, Mr. Felstead, a freelance journalist, worked for
Ltd. (1937) 3 All ER (for ref.) Mr. Donoghue, who communicated ideas for articles to him.
Felstead wrote the articles based on these ideas. Subsequently,
Felstead entered into an agreement with another newspaper to
publish an article without Donoghue's permission, adding some
material. Donoghue sought an injunction, claiming his
copyright had been infringed. The court ruled that there is no
copyright in ideas themselves. The person who expresses the
idea in a tangible form, such as writing, is the one entitled to
copyright. Since the language used in the articles was
Felstead's and not Donoghue's, and the articles were the result
of Felstead's expression of the ideas, Felstead was considered
the copyright owner, not Donoghue. The court held that the
plaintiff could not bring action against the defendant.

[Before Justice Farewell of High Court, United Kingdom]

____
IMPORTANT DOCTRINES

➔ Doctrine of sweat of brow: According to this doctrine, an author gains rights through simple
diligence during the creation of a work. Substantial creativity or “originality” is not required. The
creator is entitled to such rights on account of efforts and expense put in by him in the creation of
such a work. For Example, the creator of a telephone directory or a database must have a copyright
over the product not because such a compilation of data showcases any creativity, or the author has
expressed anything original, but merely because of the effort, time and money invested by the creator
to collect and organise all the data in a specific manner. But such a compilation must be the work of
the author himself and must not be copied from another source

➔ Doctrine of creativity/Modicum of Creativity (USA & Canadian Courts’ Approach): The concept
of “originality” has undergone a paradigm shift from the “sweat of the brow” doctrine to the
“modicum of creativity” standard put forth in Feist Publication Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service
(1991) by the United States Supreme Court. The doctrine of “sweat of the brow” provides copyright
protection on the basis of the labour, skill and investment of capital put in by the creator instead of
the originality. In Feist’s case, the US Supreme Court totally negated this doctrine and held that in
order to be original a work must not only have been the product of independent creation, but it must
 also exhibit a “modicum of creativity”. The Supreme Court prompted ‘creative originality’ and laid
down the new test to protect the creation on the basis of the minimal creativity. This doctrine
stipulates that originality subsists in a work where a sufficient amount of intellectual creativity and
judgement has gone into the creation of that work. The standard of creativity need not be high but a
minimum level of creativity should be there for copyright protection.

➔ Doctrine of Merger: seeks to rectify the issue which arises in instances of convergence of the idea
and expression in a work. The doctrine is considered to be executed in pursuance of the ‘idea-
expression dichotomy’ to establish the limits of the Copyright Law. It is irrevocably acknowledged
that ideas are not copyrightable. Therefore, an issue arises in the instance where ideas and expression
of any work intersect. This may occur when an idea can only be expressed in a singular form. One of
the widely accepted objectives of the Copyright Law is that it fosters and promotes creativity in
society. In the case of a convergence between idea and expression, protection of the latter would lead
to an obstruction on the creative expression of such an idea. Thus, courts have established that since
protection of expression of these ideas would be contradictory to the inert objectives of the Copyright
Law, these works shall not fall under the ambit of copyright protection. The underlying principle
ensures that there is no instance of gatekeeping of the creative expression of certain ideas.

b. Brief Introduction to related International Treaties and Conventions

IMPORTANT CONVENTIONS irt. COPYRIGHT

The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, 1886
a. oldest international Convention in the field of copyright providing the minimum standards of
protection
b. This convention has to be complied with while enacting laws wrt literary and artistic works as it
lays down the fundamental principles of universal application to use equitable measures for all the
interested parties.
Note: the last revision being on September 28, 1979, is a benchmark legislation, prescribing certain
minimum standards of protection relating to the rights of authors and the duration of protection and
mandated by the WTO agreement, Agreement On Trade-Related Aspect Of Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPS) for its signatories.

Three Important Principle:

1. National treatment
➔ The most significant right out of the rights provided under this Convention is the national
treatment for the works covered by the convention.

2. Automatic Protection
➔ Protection is automatically available in all the countries of union, other than the country of origin
and this is not governed by any procedural formality. But the extent of the protection, as well as
the means of redressal afforded to the author to protect his rights, shall be governed exclusively by
the laws of the country where protection is claimed.
➔ This means that while protection is assured, the procedural means of securing it is what is
prescribed by the law of the country where protection is sought.

3. Independent Protection
 ➔ Another provision that merits consideration by any government relates to the right to enforce
protected rights, particularly regarding unpublished works where identity of the author is
unknown, but where there is every ground to presume that he is a national of a country of the
Union.

Universal Copyright Convention, 1952

➔ This Convention is intended to facilitate a wider dissemination of works of the human mind and
increase international understanding.
➔ provides for the effective protection for each of the contracting states along with the rights of
authors and other copyright proprietors in literary, scientific and artistic works, including writings,
musical, dramatic, cinematographic works, paintings engravings and sculpture; national treatment
of nationals of other contracting states in respect of their work published in their own states and
unpublished work.
➔ Any dispute between two or more contrasting states concerning the interpretation or application of
this convention, not settled by negotiation, shall unless the States concerned agree on some other
method of settlement, be brought before the International Court of Justice of determination by it.

The 1971 amendment led to the addition and implementation of three rights
➔ Reproduction Rights
➔ Broadcasting Rights
➔ Public Performance Right

Compliance with some major provisions of the Berne Convention-TRIPS requirement

➔ TRIPS 1994, requires that the members of WTO shall comply with certain specific provisions of
the Berne Conventions and the Appendix thereto, expecting the provision dealing with the moral
rights of the author or of the rights deprived there from.
[Addl. reading: appendix offers scope for developing countries, by reason of their status as developing
countries, to vary the forms and duration of the rights, subject to the conditions stated therein. The
provisions of the Berne Convention which TRIPS requires to be compiled are relating to what are
protected works, the rights, the classes of literary and artistic work, cinematograph and dramatic works,
eligibility for protection, terms of protection, fair use and related matters.]

The WIPO Internet Treaties:

The WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT), 1996 and The WIPO Copyright
Treaty (WCT), 1996
➔ These treaties make it an offence to circumvent technological measures employed by authors to
protect their works.

The WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT), 1996 is a special agreement that contracting parties of the Berne
Convention may enter into without prejudice to the Berne Convention.
➔ WCT, in addition to stipulating that contracting parties apply mutatis mutandis (with the necessary
changes) the provisions of the Berne Convention, in respect of the protection provided by WCT,
requires that the following shall be protected by copyright in the countries of the contracting
parties:
1. Computer programs, whatever may be the mode or form of their expression, and
2. Compilations of data or other material (database), in any form, which by reason of the selection or
arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations.
 ➔ Article 11 and 12 of the WCT are important advances made towards more effective copyright
protection. They impose the obligation on the contracting parties to provide legal remedies against
the circumvention of technological measures used by authors in connection with the exercise of
their rights and against the removal or altering of information, such as certain data that identify the
work or their authors, necessary for the management of their rights.
➔ Article 18 and 19 of WPPT deal with obligations concerning technological measures and rights
management information in relation to the rights of performers and producers of phonograms.

These two treaties strengthen the basis towards:

1. The prohibition of infringements and attempts at infringement by circumventing technological
measures controlling access to a copyrighted work and
2. The preservation of the integrity of copyright management information.

➔ Copyright management information covers the title of work, the name of the author, the name and
identifying information about the copyright owner, information set out in the notice of copyright ,
terms and conditions for use of the work etc. Infringers, to conceal infringement give copyright
management information that is false.
➔ Conformity of Indian law, the Copyright Act, 1957 to the WIPO Treaties (Internet Treaties)
Insertion of new sections
➔ The government of India recently has published a press note stating the cabinet approval on the
accession to the WIPO Copyright Treaty, 1996 and WIPO Performance and Phonograms Treaty,
1996. India has amended the Copyright Act, 1957 to adopt these treaties through introduction of
two sections viz, section 65A and 65B by the 2012 Amendment Act.

c. Subject Matter of Copyright, Economic and Moral Rights (ss2,13,14,15,16, 57)

Chapter III: Section 13 (works in which copyright subsists) r.w. S.2 of the Copyright Act includes
the essentials which are to be included under Copyright:
a. original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works;
b. cinematograph films; and
c. sound recording

Primary Sources
Original Literary Work [s.2(o)]
➔ refers to works that are in writing
➔ includes computer programmes, tables, and compilations including computer databases
➔ certain things that cannot be protected under a copyright. For instance, phrases, names, invented
words and slogans
➔ for example the slogan which Pepsi used a while ago “Yeh Dil Mange more”, which is an
advertising slogan was held something that can not protected under the copyright Act

Original Dramatic Work [s.2(h)]

➔ including any piece of recitation, choreographic work or entertainment in dumb show, the scenic
arrangement or acting, form of which is fixed in writing or otherwise but does not include a
cinematograph film
 ➔ terms literary and dramatic are used together and the principle applicable to literary work will be
applicable to dramatic work as well. The author of a dramatic work is the person who authors the
work

Original Musical Work [s.2(p)]

➔ a work consisting of music and includes any graphical notation of such work but does not include
any work or any action intended to be sung, spoken or performed with the music
➔ In the 2012 Amendment, there was a grant of statutory licence for cover versions.
➔ A song typically contains both literary and musical work. Therefore, the tune and lyrics together
form a song. Lyric of a song is the literary part and it is protected as a literary work and the writer
of the lyrics is the author of the work.

Original Artistic Works [s.2(c)]

➔ Includes a painting, a sculpture, a drawing includes a diagram, map, chart or plan, an engraving or
a photograph, and whether or not any such work possesses artistic quality
➔ A work of architecture is included as an artistic work and any work of artistic craftsmanship can
also come under the ambit of an artistic work.

Derivative Sources
Sound Recording [s.2(xx)]
➔ a recording of sound from which such sounds may be produced regardless of the medium on
which such recording is made or the method by which the sounds are produced
➔ The sound recording may involve musicians, it may involve singers, but the author is the
producer.

Cinematograph Films [s.2(f)]

➔ means any work of visual recording and includes a sound recording accompanying such visual
recording and sound recording accompanying such visual recording and “cinematograph” shall be
construed as including any work produced by any process analogous to cinematography including
video films

NOTE: The term of copyright varies depending on the kind of work that is protected. Literary, musical,
dramatic and artistic works are protected for the life of the author and after the death for a period of 60
years. For posthumous work published after the death of the author. It is 60 years from the time the
work was first published. Therefore, cinematograph films sound recording, government works, works
of international organisations all are prospected for 60 years from the work first published

Case Laws:
Name Principle(s) as laid down:

Eastern Book Co. & Ors. v. D.B. - This case deals with the concept of originality under
Modak and Anr. (2008) 36 PTC 1 Section 13 and 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957
SC - Appellant has published the law report called as
- appellant 1, who is the Eastern “Supreme Court Cases” which consists reportable
Book Company (EBC), and and non-reportable judgments, orders, decree and
appellant 2, EBC Publishing directions of the Supreme Court
Private Ltd. company, were - appellants procured the data from registrar of the
engaged together for printing and Supreme Court and then published them after editing,
 publishing various books in the formatting and making it user friendly
field of law. - In 2001, respondents came out with the software
‘Grand Jurix’ and ‘the Laws’ publishing the same CD
ROMs.
- Respondents used the judgements of the appellants,
and the appellants filed a suit of injunction against
respondents on the infringement of their copyright.

Held:
- The Court further said that the judgement of the court
would be government work as per Section 2(k) of the
Act. And Section 52(q)(iv) of the Act exempts the
reproduction and publication of the decisions of the
Courts unless it is prohibited, from copyright
infringement.
- The court partially allowed the appeal and said the
defendant shall not use the paragraphs made by the
appellants in the copy-edited version of the
judgments.
[Before B.N. Agrawal & P.P. Naolekar,
JJ.]

Relx India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. - There was an infringement of copyright wrt copy
Eastern Book Co. & Ors. (2017) 69 edited version of the judgement published in SCC
PTC 211 SC and it was emphasised that the exclusive right
remains with the owner of the copyright; aspect of
originality was elaborated upon.
- SC laid down that the appellant has the liberty to
utilise the judgements obtained from whichever
source as laid down in D.B. Modak case
- Directions were issued to the appellant as provided
under the above case for publishing, selling and
distributing raw judgements of the Supreme Court
with their own inputs.
[Before Ranjan Gogoi, N.V. Ramana, JJ.]

Krishna Lulla & Ors. v. Shyam Whether the title of the work would be copyrightable ?
Vithalrao Devkatta & Anr. (2016) - The court noted that Section 13 of the Copyright Act,
65 PTC 312 SC (for reference) 1957 provides protection for original literary work.
The court stated that a title by itself cannot be
considered as complete by itself without the work
that follows.
- It further stated that the title ‘Desi Boys’ is the
combination of the two words ‘Desi’ and ‘Boys’
which are very commonly used words in India and
that has nothing original in it. The mere use of
common words as used here cannot qualify for being
described as ‘literary’. Therefore, no copyright
subsist in the title ‘Desi Boys’ under Section 13 of
the Copyright Act, 1957.
[Before Madan B. Lokar, S.A. Bobde, JJ.]

______
Rights under Copyright
a. Exclusive Economic Rights (s.14)
➔ Any right that yields or pays off the owner monetarily are said to be the economic rights. The
economic rights of the owner have been listed out in Section 14 of the principal Act, under the
meaning of copyright.

1. Right to reproduce the work: Such right shall exclusively be exercised by the owner of the
work and shall not be infringed by any other person since the act of reproduction of the work
may economically make benefits to its owner. The concept of substantial and material copying
has also been enclosed within the reproductive right. In regards to the violation of copyright of
the owner, it is not necessary to copy the entire subject matter of the work to be held responsible
for such infringement and a part of the reproduction of a particular work would be enough for
the infringement of the same.

2. Right to distribute in the market: Owner also has a right to distribute in the market and make
money out of it. The act of distribution may be in the form of sale, lending for free or for a
consideration, rental, or free distribution by the way of gift. If the work that has been sold is a
book, the rule of exhaustion shall be applied. Wherein the right to distribute the book will be
exhausted and ceases to exist after the first sale of it and the buyer of the book will be further
entitled to resale it as a second hand material.

3. Right to communicate to the public: letting or making the product/work available to the public
by way of broadcasting, simulcasting or webcasting. In Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v.
Aditya Pandey, 2011, the Delhi High Court held that “the defendant is accordingly restrained
from communicating any of such works to the public, or performing them, in the public, without
such appropriate authorization, or licensing.”

4. Right of adaptation: Conversion, alteration, transcription or rearranging a copyrighted work

means and includes the right of adaptation. exclusively available only to musicals.

5. Right to translate: The owner of the copyrighted work has a right to translate his work to any
other languages he wants.

6. Right to commercial rental: in case of a computer programme and sound recording. Under
a rental right, the copyright owner may collect royalties from third parties engaged in the
commercial rental of his copyrighted works.

b. Moral Rights (s.57 & s.38B): recognizes the personal reputation of an artist or creator (addl. doc)

➔ Right of retraction means that the creator has the right to have her name associated with her
work - or disassociated if the work is damaged or modified in a way that leads the artist to feel that
the work is no longer an embodiment of her intended expression. In Amarnath Sehgal v
Union of India 2005 (30) PTC 253 (Del), the court pointed out the right to retraction as to
withdraw one's own publication if the author feels the condition of his work is derogatory in
nature and are advisable to do the withdrawal of the same. This would be the author’s right to
retraction.
➔ Right of integrity means that the work may not be changed, altered, distorted, or mutilated. In
1928, these concepts were included in Article 6bis of the Berne Convention for the Protection of
Literary and Artistic Work, which governs international copyright. In Sajeev Pillai v. Venu
Kunnapalli & ors 2019 – KER HC., the respondent was alleged on the act of pre – release
publicity of the movie which was yet to be released without an authorised permission. The court
granted relief to the aggrieved petitioner by restraining the respondent to carry on such act which
damages the exclusiveness and reputation of the movie.
In Mannu Bhandari v. Kala Vikas Pictures Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. AIR 1987 Delhi 13 both the
parties had entered into a contract for assigning the rights to the respondent to make a film based
on the popular novel “Aap ka Bunty”. It was agreed that certain modifications could be made by
the filmmakers (film was called as Samay Ki Dhara) It was contented by the appellant that the
film contained distorted modifications of her literary work which could hamper her reputation as a
hindi lit. writer. Court concluded that certain scenes in the film must be changed before the
screening to maintain the original plot of the novel, so the parties arrived at a settlement before the
pronouncement of the judgement. The filmmakers agreed to delete the names of the author and her
novel from the film credits, while Mannu Bhandari agreed to not claim any rights or interest in the
film.

➔ Right of Paternity: right of an owner of copyright to claim and prevent others to claim the
ownership of his copyrighted work is said to be a right of paternity. Sholay Media Entertainment
and Pvt. Ltd. V Parag M. Sanghavi 223 (2015) DLT 152, was a landmark judgement delivered on
the Right of paternity of the copyright owner, where the court granted protection to the title of the
movie which made the defendant to replace his’ movie title completely by refraining the use of the
name which causes damage to the cult of the name “Sholay” since it was deceptively similar with
the same.

c. Neighbouring Rights
➔ Broadcasting Reproduction Rights (s.37 & s.39): These rights are vested in a broadcasting
organisation, including television, radio, or other telecasting providers. It means that where a
live performance is facilitated by a broadcaster, he has all the rights to authorise or prohibit
the use of the program. Hence, if the same program is recorded and put on the internet for the
public to see, it is a violation of the broadcaster’s rights.

➔ Public Performance/Performer’s Right (s.38, 38A, 38B & 39): These rights vest in
performers, which include musicians and actors. They protect their performances against any
unauthorised and illicit recording or transmission. The same also gives the power to exploit
and guarantee a certain degree of control over the exploitation and remunerations earned
whenever these recordings, including their performances, are commercially exploited. It
means that only when the performer’s consent has been legally obtained can the work be
communicated to the public; otherwise, it shall be a violation of his neighbouring rights.

Addl Info: The Rome International Convention, also known as the International Convention
for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms, and Broadcasting Organizations,
specifies that performers have the right to oppose the broadcast, communication to the public, fixing,
or reproduction of their performances. The Convention is one of the most crucial conventions on an
international level, which was adopted way back in 1961. It is jointly managed and directed by the
 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the International
Labour Organization (ILO), and WIPO.

The Beijing Treaty on Audio-Visual Performance (BTAP), 2012 also protects the performers,
producers, and broadcasters in various ways that may appear to be more extensive in nature. They
offer protection of neighbouring rights for up to 50 years with an increased scope of protection of the
rights of performers and producers while expanding into the digital era with the protection extended
to the exploitation of protected works even over the internet.

d. Authorship and Ownership (s17), Term of Copyright and Assignment-Licensing (ss18-31)

PYQP: Difference between Authorship and Ownership of copyright (for reference)

Section 17 of the act provides that the author shall be the first owner of the copyright
➔ In the case of literary or dramatic composition, the author,
➔ In the case of musical work, the musician,
➔ In the case of creative work apart from photography, the artist,
➔ In the case of photographic work, the artist,
➔ In the case of cinematographic or recording work, the producer,
➔ In case of any work generated by any computer virus, the one who created it

It also provides for certain set of exceptions wherein the ownership might be acquired:
According to Section 17, the author of the work is the first proprietor of the brand therein. This is subject
to the following statutory exceptions:

a) Literary, dramatic, cultural work [s.17(a)] − where the work is made by the author in
the course of his employment by the owner of a review, magazine or analogous
journal under a contract of service or internship, for the purpose of publication in a
review, magazine or any similar journal etc., the said owner, in the absence of any agreement
to the negative, will be the first proprietor of the brand in the work so far as it relates to the publication of
the work in the review etc. or to the reduplication of the work for the purpose of its being so published .
But in all the other felicitations the author will be the first proprietor of the brand.

b) Snap, oil, portrayal, drawing or cinematographic film [s.17(b)] − where a snap is taken, or
an oil or portrayal is drawn, or a drawing or cinematographic film is made for a
precious consideration at the case of any similar person, in the absence of any
agreement to the negative, will be the first proprietor of the brand therein. Where,
still, a person does any of the below in the course of his employment by the owner
of a review, magazine or analogous journal under a contract of service or internship,
for the purpose of publication in a review, magazine or any similar journal etc., the
said owner, in the absence of any agreement to the negative, will be the first
proprietor of the brand.

c) Work made in the course of employment [s.17(c)]− in the case of a work made in the
course of author’s employment under a contract of service or internship, the
employer (not being owner of a review, magazine or analogous journal), in the
absence of any agreement to the negative, is the first proprietor of the brand.
d) Lectures delivered in public [s.17(cc)]− where a person has delivered any address or
speech in public that person will be the first proprietor of the brand therein. If the
speech is delivered on behalf of some other person, a similar other proprietor will
be the first proprietor of the brand. This is so indeed if the person who delivers the
speech is employed by any other person who arranges similar address or speech or
on whose behalf or demesne it’s delivered.

e) Government work [s.17(d)] − in the case of government work, the government, in the
absence of any agreement to the negative, will be the first proprietor of the brand.

f) Work made on behalf of a public undertaking [s.17(dd)]− in the case of work made or first
published by or under the direction or control of any public undertaking similar
public undertaking will, in the absence of any agreement to the negative will be the
first proprietor of brand therein.

g) Workshop of certain transnational organisations [s.17(ee)] − in similar cases the

transnational organisations concerned will be the first proprietor of the brand.

_____
Term of Copyright (Ch.V SS.22-29) (for reference)

A. General Rule (s.22) wrt primary sources (literary, dramatic, artistic and musical work) published
within the lifetime of an author shall subsist unit 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year
next following the year in which the author dies. Furthermore (as provided under Explanation), in
case of joint authorship it shall subsist from the period of the author who dies last.
B. In cases wherein the literary, dramatic, artistic and musical work is done as a matter of anonymous
or pseudonymous work, copyright shall subsist for 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year
next following the year in which the work is first published. (s.23)
- In cases wherein the identity of the author is disclosed the above mentioned provisions shall
apply.

C. For literary, dramatic, musical work or an engraving in which copyright subsists at the date of death
(Posthumous) of such author or joint authors (last dies) for which any adaptation has not been
published before that date, the copyright shall subsist for 60 years from the beginning of the calendar
year next following the year in which the work is first published. (s.24)
Subsection (2) provides that in case an adaptation of any work have been published or it has been
performed in public (or any sound recordings made) then it would be deemed to have been sold to
public or have been offered for sale to the public

D. Cinematograph films: copyright shall subsist for 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year
next following the year in which the film is first published. (s.26)

E. Sound Recording: copyright shall subsist for 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year next
following the year in which the sound recording is first published. (s.27)
F. Government Work: copyright shall subsist for 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year next
following the year (wherein the govt. is the first owner of the copyright) in which the work is first
published. (s.28)

G. Public Undertaking: copyright shall subsist for 60 years from the beginning of the calendar year next
following the year (wherein the PU is the first owner of the copyright) in which the work is first
published. (s.28A)

H. International Organisation: copyright shall subsist for 60 years from the beginning of the calendar
year next following the year (to which the provisions of s.41 applies) in which the work is first published.
(s.29)
___
Assignment and mode of assignment (SS. 18, 19 & 19A)
➔ Owner of copyright for an existing work or a prospective owner of copyright may assign his existing
or future copyrighted work either wholly or partly and as a result of such assignment the assignee
becomes entitled to all the rights related to copyright to the assigned work, and he shall be treated as
the owner of the copyright in respect of those rights. (s.18)

Modes (s.19)
As per Section 19, these conditions are necessary for a valid assignment:
➔ It should be in writing and signed;
➔ It should specify the kinds of rights assigned and the duration or territorial extent; and
➔ It should specify the amount of royalty payable if required in any case.
NOTE: if the period is not mentioned in the agreement it will be considered as five years and if the
territorial extent is not stipulated in the agreement, it will be considered as applicable to the whole
of India.

Disputes related to the assignment of copyright (s.19A)

According to the Copyright Act, 1957, the appellant board where the receipt of the complaint by the
assignor and after holding necessary inquiry finds that the assignee has failed to make the exercise of the
rights assigned to him, and such failure is attributed to any act or omission of the assignor, may by
suitable order, revoke such assignment. However, if the dispute arises with respect to the assignment of
any copyright then that appellate board may also order the recovery of any royalty payable.

Operation of law in assignment

According to The Copyright Act, 1957, where under a bequest a person is entitled to the manuscript of
any literary, dramatic or any other kind of work and such work has not been published before the death of
the testator, unless the contrary is proved such person shall be treated as the owner for such work.

___
License and Types of License (Ch. VI, S.30)
➔ Granting of a license doesn't mean transfer of ownership, it only grants the right to use the property.
➔ Section 30 of the Copyright Act, 1957 empowers the owner of copyright to grant an interest in the
right by a license in writing (can also be granted in the future work and will start existing once it
comes into existence)

Types
 ➔ Statutory license (s.31)
➔ Compulsory license (SS. 31A & 31B)

Difference between Compulsory and Statutory License

In case of Compulsory Licensing, the royalty is kept to be negotiated by the parties whereas in Statutory
Licensing, the royalty is prescribed by the Copyright Board. In Statutory Licensing, no permission is
required to be taken from the owner to use his work as the permission is given by the Statute unlike in
Compulsory Licensing.

COMPULSORY LICENSE STATUTORY LICENSE

Section 31 deals with compulsory licence in works Section 31 C deals with statutory licensing to
withheld from the public. make cover versions (sound recordings).
- means that the use of owner’s rights - A person desirous of making cover
against payment is either set by law or versions, being a sound recording in
determined through some form of respect of any literary, dramatic or musical
adjudication or arbitration. In other words, work, where the sound recording of that
prior permission from the right owner is work has been made by or with the license
not required if the mandate provided by or with the consent of the owner, may do
law is met with. so in accordance of the provisions of the
Act and rules 23 – 28 of the Copyright
Rules, 2013 that talks about the procedure
which needs to be followed to get the
license

States that if the owner of the rights has refused to Section 31 D deals with broadcasting of literary,
republish or allow republication or allow musical works and sound recording
performance or allow communication by way of - Any broadcasting organisation desirous of
broadcast to the public, the aggrieved person may communicating to the public by way of
reach out to the Appellate Board.Appellate Board, broadcast or by way of performance of
after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard sound recording, musical or literary works,
to the owner, may hold an inquiry. If the Board is which has already been published may do
satisfied that the grounds put by the owner are not so by giving prior notice of its intention to
reasonable then it shall direct the Registrar of broadcast such work and by paying royalty
Copyrights to grant the license to the complainant fee to the copyright owners at the rate
upon payment of such fees to the owner. fixed by the Intellectual Property Appellate
Board (IPAB).

31 A deals with compulsory license in For example: If S is desirous of making a cover

unpublished or published works withheld from version of a musical work with the license of the
public where the author/owner owner, he may do so by following the procedure.
- is (i) dead, (ii) unknown or (iii) cannot be He has to first serve a notice mentioning the
traced, any person shall approach the intention of his work, provide copies of all the
Appellate Board for a license to publish or covers and labels with which such sound recording
communicate to the public such work or a will be sold, shall pay in advance to the owner(s)
translation in any language. of the copyright the fee as prescribed by the
Appellate Board. The cover version shall not be
changed to such an extent where the original
meaning or composition is lost in entirety. S has to
also follow all such procedures as mentioned in
the Act and Rules.

31 B deals with compulsory license for benefit of - Section 31 D does not cover ‘downloading/
 disabled purchase’ of works
- Any person working for the benefit of - Section 31 D does not cover internet
disabled persons on a profit basis or for broadcasting
business may apply to the Appellate Board - Section 31 D cannot be invoked without
in such form and manner as prescribed in prior fixation of royalty rates by IPAB
the Act and rules, for a compulsory license (Tips Industries Ltd vs Wynk Music Ltd.
to publish any work in which copyright Commercial Suit (L) no. 113 & 114 of 2018 Bom
subsists for the benefit of such persons. High Court)

Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. (2012)

Whether the Copyright Board has the authority to issue temporary orders and determine the
royalties for a temporary order in proceedings under Section 31 of the Copyright Act, 1957?
➔ The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the instant case held that the Copyright Board did not have the power
to grant interim compulsory licence. It would amount to near-final relief if granted, and even regular
courts have to exercise such powers with great caution.
➔ The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a compulsory licence encroaches on the rights of a copyright
holder, so it can only be granted if there is public interest involved, mere financial gain is incidental.
➔ The Hon’ble Supreme Court, explaining what can be considered unreasonable, stated that it could be
decided only after the owner of the copyright was given a full hearing opportunity. If the creator feels
that republication or performance of his sound recording will be so controversial that it will
endanger his life, it is not “unreasonable”.

e.
Infringement and Remedies (ss50-61)
Copyright infringement occurs when any of the following occur (s.51):
➔ unauthorised use of the exclusive rights of the owner of a copyright whether in relation to the whole or
a substantial part of the copyright work;
➔ permitting a place to be used for infringing purposes on a profit basis; and
➔ displaying or exhibiting in public by way of trade or distributing for the purpose of trade or importing
infringing copies of a work.
In the case of MySpace Inc v Super Cassettes Industries Ltd, 2016 the Division Bench of the Delhi
High Court held that the word ‘place’ mentioned in section 51 of the Copyright Act is broad enough to
include the internet and therefore displaying infringing work on the internet would amount to copyright
infringement.
In Chancellor Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford v. Rameshwari Photocopy Services
and Ors. 2017 (69) PTC 123 (Del) DB (for reference)
➔ The argument of the petitioners here was that the creation of course packs, including the photocopying
of copyrighted materials required for the same, was an infringement of the exclusive copyright of the
authors and publishers. The defendants, on the other hand, argued that this fell within the exception to
copyright provided for under S. 52(1)(i) of the Copyright Act, 1957.
➔ course packs were compilations of excerpts from academic publications, including publications from
the petitioners, which were part of the official syllabus of the Delhi University. A master copy was
created by the University from the original books that it had purchased, and photocopies of the same
where issued to the university students by the photocopy shop
➔ SINGLE BENCH JUDGEMENT: Justice Endlaw had ruled in favour of the respondents in the case,
i.e., Rameshwari Photocopy Services and others, stating that the photocopying involved was covered
 under education exception embodied in S. 52(1)(i) of the Copyright Act, 1957. The Single Judge
Bench had found no triable issue on fact and dismissed the case outright.
➔ DIVISION BENCH held that 9 The Bench stated that, “the fairness in the use can be determined on
the touchstone of ‘extent justified by the purpose”. In other words, the utilisation of the copyrighted
work would be a fair use to the extent justified for the purpose of education.

Substantial Taking under infringement:

➔ Copyright in a work is infringed if a substantial part is taken from it.
➔ What is “substantial” is a question of fact and degree: typically included the vital part of the work and
need not denote the quantity in which the work has been copied. Lord Reid held in Ladbroke v.
William Hill (1964) that the question whether a party has copied a substantial part depends more on
the quality than the quantity. In case of a musical work, a single note in certain cases might lead to an
infringement as it forms the “essential part” of the copyrighted work.
➔ The complainant must prima facie establish originality and the copying complained of must be
substantial and should not be a mere chance occurrence. Furthermore, it should be shown that the
copying affects the fruits of his labour (reference to doctrine of sweat of brow).

In Zee Telefilms v. Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd. (2003), the Bombay HC observed that having
considered two works involved in the case not hypothetically and with meticulous scrutiny but by
observation and impressions of an average viewer.
FACTS
a. The company of the plaintiff was involved in the video making program, multimedia, serials for
television production etc. They create new, innovative, concepts which are produced through
pictures, crafts, sketches, notes. These concepts were also registered under the Films Writers
Association and the Indian Motion pictures producers association also registered the titles of the
programmes.
b. In the year 2002, the plaintiff came up with a concept which is titled ‘kanhaiya’. After some time the
title got changed to ‘Krishna kanhaiyya’ and a detailed record of the notes made, character sketches,
plots of the episodes were sent to the defendants.
c. The plaintiff and the defendant met and discussed the price but after that, no confirmation was
provided from the defendant’s side. Since they did not get any proper explanation, they proceeded with
the same concept with Sony Entertainment Television. But they actually directly disagreed to produce
such because they pointed out that on the same concept which the plaintiff was producing; the
defendant had already started working

ISSUE:
1. Whether there were any substantial similarities between the 2 works and does it create confusion?
2. Whether the defendant’s work actually violated the copyright of the plaintiff and was there any misuse
of the confidential information or not?

HELD:
The High Court of Bombay clearly pointed out that there is a huge difference between breach of
confidence and the law of copyright.

The principle of confidentiality includes both published and unpublished ideas which may be merely
disclosed or to be disclosed in a relationship of trust basis. Here, in this case, there was the concept of
breach of confidentiality since there was some amount of similarity between the concept of the
plaintiff and the concept of the defendant.
 An injunction can be granted as there was a breach of confidentiality. Hence, the court rejected all the
contention provided by the defendant’s side and also held that the plaintiff’s idea was novel. And
while comparing both the concepts, the court found that there was a substantial part copied and hence,
there was an infringement of copyright and also a breach of confidentiality.

It also lays down that under breach of confidence, it is not just to the extent of original work or
recipient; rather it also extends to those persons who get the information with the knowledge acquired
at that point of time or who have the knowledge that the original information which was provided was
in confidence and still disclose it.

_____
Remedies

CIVIL REMEDIES
These remedies are given under Section 55 of the Copyright Act,1957 which are:

Interlocutory injunction
This is the most important remedy against copyright infringement, it means a judicial process by which
one who is threatening to invade or has invaded the legal or equitable rights of another is restrained from
commencing or continuing such act, or is commanded to restore matters to the position in which they
stood previous to the relation. Thus for granting the interlocutory injunction, the following three factors
are considered as necessary:
➔ Prima facie case, is an assumption of the court that the plaintiff can succeed in the case and become
eligible for relief.
➔ Balance of convenience, in it the court will determine which parties suffer the greater harm, this
determination can vary with the facts of each case.
➔ Irreparable injury, it is difficult to decide and determine on a case-by-case basis. Some examples of it
include- loss of goodwill or irrevocable damages to reputation, and loss of market share.

Mareva injunction
This is a particular form of the interlocutory injunction which restrains the defendant from disposing of
assets that may be required to satisfy the plaintiff’s claim or for removing them from the jurisdiction of
the Court.

Anton Piller order

This order is passed to take into possession the infringed documents, copies and other relevant material of
the defendant, by the solicitor of the plaintiff. This order is named after the famous case of Anton Piller
KG v/s Manufacturing Process Ltd, 1976. In this case, the plaintiff Antone Piller, the German
manufacturer is successful in passing ex-parte awards of restraining the use of his copyrighted products
against the defendant.

John Deo’s order

In this order, the Court has the power to injunct rather than those impeded in the suit, who may be found
violating the rights in the field of copyright. Thus this order is issued against the unknown person, who
has allegedly committed some wrong, but whose identities cannot entertain the plaintiff.

Pecuniary remedies
There are three types of pecuniary remedies provided:
1. An account of profit, lets the owner seek the sum of money made, equal to the profit made through
unlawful conduct.
2. Compensatory damages, which let the copyright owner seek the damages he suffered.
3. Conversational damages are assessed to the value of the article.

CRIMINAL REMEDIES
Section 63 of the Copyright Act provides for criminal remedies if there is any copyright infringement.
According to Section 63 of the Act, anyone found guilty of willfully violating or aiding in the violation of
a work’s copyright will be sentenced to at least six months in prison and a fine of at least 50,000 rupees.
A person who is found guilty under Section 63A a second time faces an additional sentence of
imprisonment for a term not less than one year and a fine that cannot be less than one lakh rupees due to
the widespread copyright infringement. According to Section 63B, a person who intentionally uses an
illegal copy of computer software on a computer faces a minimum seven-day sentence in jail and a fine of
at least 50,000 rupees.

For infringement of copyright, the criminal remedies provided under Section 63:
➔ Imprisonment, not less than 6 months which may extend up to 3 years;
➔ Fine may not be less than 50,000 which may extend up to 2,00,000;
➔ Search and seizure of copyrighted goods; and
➔ Delivery of copyrighted goods to the copyrighted owner.

In the case of repeat offenders, minimum punishment terms of 1 year and fine of 1 lakh however, the
highest punishment will be the same as the first time offender.

f. Exception of fair dealing

Section 52 lays down certain acts or works that cannot be considered as an infringement of copyright
namely fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work not being a computer program for
the purposes of-
➔ fair dealing with any work, not being a computer programme, for the purposes of—
(i) “private or personal use, including research;
(ii) criticism or review, whether of that work or of any other work;
(iii) the reporting of current events and current affairs, including the reporting of a lecture
delivered in public.

➔ the transient or incidental storage of a work or performance purely in the technical process of
electronic transmission or communication to the public;

➔ transient or incidental storage of a work or performance for the purpose of providing electronic
links, access or integration, where such links, access or integration has not been expressly
prohibited by the right holder, unless the person responsible is aware or has reasonable grounds for
believing that such storage is of an infringing copy:

➔ the reproduction of any work for the purpose of a judicial proceeding or for the purpose of a report
of a judicial proceeding;
 Folsom vs Marsh– This case was the first-ever case of “Fair Use” in U.S. wherein, Justice Story has set
forth the following four factors to determine a work to be of Fair Use, which later went to be codified
under the Copyright Act, 1976:
1. “The nature and objects of the selections made;
2. The nature of the original work;
3. The amount is taken; and
4. The degree in which the use may prejudice the sale, or diminish the profits, or supersede the
objects, of the original work.”

In Super Cassettes Industries Limited & Ors. v. Chintamani Rao & Ors (2012)
➔herein a news channel called India TV, used certain copyright works such as sound recordings and
clips of films produced by Super Cassettes’ and Yash Raj Films’ respectively without obtaining
appropriate licences and defended its action to be covered under fair dealing as embodied in
Section 52(1)(a) and 52(1)(b) of the Copyright Act wherein any copyright work used for the
purpose of reporting current events would not amount to copyright infringement.

➔The Learned Single Judge of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court rejected the fair use defence inter alia,
on the grounds that the Copyright Act provides for specific rights vested in a copyright holder
along with specific exceptions thereto and a general principle outside the scope cannot be applied
by the Court;

➔This was taken in appeal by India TV and the primary questions before the Division Bench were
(i) whether use of a single line from a song from a film produced by Yash Raj Films (“YRF”)
would amount to copyright infringement and
(ii) whether singing a few lines from different songs of films produced by YRF, by a singer, who
originally sung the songs in the films, in a chat show would constitute copyright infringement.

The Division Bench allowed the appeal and set out the three approaches adopted by courts for
applying the de minimis principle to copyright law i.e.
(i) substantial similarity analysis
(ii) the fair use analysis and
(iii) applying de minimis where violation is ascertained to be trifling unimportant or insufficient.

The Division Bench analysed the pros and cons of all three approaches in detail and laid down the
following factors to be considered for applying de minimis as a defence for copyright infringement
the Division Bench held that the use of lyrics from a sound recording owned by YRF for an
advertisement of “Sab Golmaal Hai” by India TV, was trivial and attracted the defence of de minimis
as the harm caused due to such infringement was trifle since the use was only five words from five
stanzas; India TV’s intent was not to steal but to educate the public by raising consumer awareness and
basis YRFs stance that it would charge Rs. 10,000/- as license for such usage, the Division Bench
concluded that the amount was too trivial in comparison to the social cost of adjudication

i.
International Copyright Order (ss40-41) (for reference)

In India, Copyright is regulated by the Copyright Act of 1957 and the Copyright Rules of 2013, and
the International Copyright Order, 1999. The Copyright Act of 1957 is the primary Act concerning
 Copyright, while the Copyright Rules of 2013 and the International Copyright Order of 1999 are
supplementary laws.

Section 40 of the Copyright Act allows the Central Government to extend copyright to foreign works
by publishing an Order in the Official Gazette.
➔Only countries mentioned in the International Copyright Order, 1999, can be accorded copyright
in India.
➔Territories outside India mentioned in this section must be included in the International Copyright
Order of 1999 for copyright claims in India.
➔The Central Government can extend provisions of the Copyright Act to works from foreign
countries as if they were Indian works.
➔This includes works published abroad to be treated as if published in India, and unpublished works
by foreign authors to be treated as if authored by Indian citizens.
➔The Act applies to authors domiciled outside India as if they were domiciled in India.
➔For works by authors from foreign countries, the Act applies as if the author were an Indian
citizen at the time of publication.

S.41 Copyright in a foreign work exists throughout India if:

➔The work is made or first published by or under the direction or control of any organisation.
➔There is no copyright in the work in India at the time of its first publication.
➔The work is published in pursuance of an agreement with the author that does not reserve the
copyright to the author, or under Section 17 where any copyright in the work belongs to the
organisation.

Any international organisation without legal capacity at the time is deemed to have had the legal
capacity of a body corporate for holding, dealing with, and enforcing copyright. Organisations
covered under this section are those in the International Copyright Order, 1999.

The International Copyright Order is an important piece of law concerning the copyright of foreign
works. It was passed on 24th March 1999 and came to force on 6th April 1999. It was passed by the
Central Government in the exercise of its power given in Section 40 of the Copyright Act, 1957. It was
passed in supersession of its predecessor, the International Copyright Order of 1991.

The Order contains the conditions and formalities for foreign works and a schedule which is divided
into six parts which list out the countries that are eligible for copyright protection in India. The
countries which are parties to the
➔Berne Convention, 1971
➔Universal Copyright Convention, 1951
➔Geneva Phonograms Convention, 197
➔Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement
that have either ratified, accepted or acceded to the above-mentioned Conventions or are yet to
ratify, accept or accede to the above-mentioned Conventions are eligible to avail protection under
the Copyright Act, 1957.

j. Issues in Digital Copyrights

The issue of copyright has gotten increasingly complex and difficult in the digital age. Given the
broad availability of digital technologies, copying, distributing, and manipulating digital content is
now easier than ever. This has resulted in several copyright difficulties, such as piracy,
infringement, and the unlawful use of protected materials.

Following are some of the most important copyright issues in the

digital age −
➔Piracy is one of the most important problems in the digital age. It involves the illicit duplication
and distribution of copy-protected works, such as music, films, software, and books. In many
parts of the world, particularly in developing nations where copyright rules are not effectively
enforced, piracy is widespread.

➔Infringement occurs when someone utilises copyrighted content without authorization or credit.
This includes the use of copyrighted photos or videos on a website, the use of copyrighted
music in a video or podcast, and the sale of products with copyrighted images or logos.

➔Fair Use is a legal doctrine that permits the use of copyrighted materials for specific purposes,
including commentary, criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Yet, the
notion of fair use is frequently open to interpretation, and it can be challenging to evaluate
whether a specific use of copyrighted material qualifies as fair use.

➔Digital Rights Management (DRM) is a set of technologies used to prevent unauthorised

duplication and distribution of copy-protected content. Nonetheless, DRM has been criticised
for restricting users' legal and fair use of copy-protected content, such as generating backup
copies of digital content.

➔Copyright rules vary greatly from country to country, making it difficult to enforce copyright
laws in the digital age. This has resulted in several worldwide copyright infringement lawsuits,
especially in the music and film industries.

Copyright in the digital era is a dynamic problem that brings new issues and opportunities for
artists, users, and regulators. While digital technologies have facilitated the creation, sharing, and
distribution of works, they have also facilitated the violation of copyright owners' rights.

Further, it has to be understood that tackling copyright concerns in the digital age necessitates a
multidimensional strategy that includes improving copyright laws, expanding education and
awareness, developing new business models, investigating technology solutions, and fostering
international collaboration. Content creators, consumers, and governments may ensure that
copyright law remains effective and relevant in the digital age by cooperating.

US COURTS: A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (2001) was a landmark
intellectual property (ref. The Social Network - Justin Timberlake; addl. reading)
Facts: Started by a Freshman in Northeastern University in the year. It provided a platform for
users to access and download compressed digital music files, specifically MP3s, from other users'
machines. Napster's ease of use compared to other peer-to-peer services quickly made it a
popular service for music enthusiasts to find and download digital song files for free.
Issues:
1. Direct Infringement: The Circuit Court agreed with the district court's determination that
Napster users were probably engaging in direct infringement of plaintiffs' copyrights.

2. Fair use as a defence: widespread wholesale transfer of plaintiff's music negatively affected the
market for CD sales and that it also jeopardised the record industry's future in digital markets.

The Court of Appeals sided with the District Court and confirmed that Napster’s users could not be
considered ‘fair users’.

Deemed to be a landmark judgement in its time, it was pronounced when the Internet was
beginning to become a thing of the present and issues related to peer-to-peer sharing were quite
unheard of. It prompted the copyright owners and the Courts to evaluate their outlook toward
copyright-protected works in the context of the digital environment.