Law of Copyright

By

Dr.P.R.L.Rajavenkatesan
Assistant Professor(Senior)
School of Law
VIT University
Chennai
 Origin and Development
of Copyright
 Guttenberg to Information Age
 Copyright is a kind of intellectual property
right. It is a proprietary right(Bundle of Rights)
of the artist, author or creator and comes into
existence as soon as the work is created.
 Copyright is a right given by the law to the
creator of the literary, dramatic, musical works
etc.,
 It is the right to copy or reproduce the work in
which copyright subsists.
Origin and Development
of Copyright

 Protecting and rewarding creativity

 Balance should be maintained
between the interest of the creator
and of the community.
Origin and Development
of Copyright
 Invention of Guttenberg’s printing
press in Germany in 1436
 Book sellers and Printers
 The art of printing spread quickly in
Europe
 England emerged as a major centre of
printing trade in Europe -1483
 Book sellers and printers were called
the “stationer’s” in England.
 Origin and Development
of Copyright
 In 1557, Queen Mary I, granted the privilege
of regulating the book trade to the Stationer’s
company of London. In 1662, the Licensing Act
was passed in England, which prohibited the
printing of any book which was not licensed
and registered with the Stationers’ Company.
 Statute of Anne,1709-Limited period and
Public domain
 Before enactment-Rights of Authors-21 Years
 After enactment of Statute of Anne-14 Years
 Origin and Development
of Copyright
 Prior to the enactment of the statute,
common law provided that the sole right of
printing and publishing shall continue ad-
infinitum(again and again in the same way).
 Promoting Learning
 Prior to the Statute of Anne, the common
law of England recognised a perpetual right
of property in the author’s “copy” in the
manuscript.
 Every man has a natural right of property
to the fruits of his labour’
 Case Law
 Millar v. Taylor,
 Stationer as their perpetual
protection of common right was
upheld
 Donaldson v. Beckett, 98 Eng Rep
201 (KB 1769).
 Exclusive rights of the author or
publisher
 Copyright Law in India
 Copyright law happened in 1847
through an enactment during the East
India Company’s regime.
 Term of copyright was for the lifetime
of the author plus seven years post-
mortem
 “highest local court exercising
original civil jurisdiction”-
Infringement.
 Copyright Law in India
 Under a contract of service copyright in
“any encyclopaedia, review, magazine,
periodical work or work published in a
series of books or parts” shall vest in the
“proprietor, projector, publisher or
conductor”.
 The copyright in a work was not
automatic unlike today. Registration of the
work with Home Office was mandatory for
the protection of rights
 Copyright Law in India
 The Copyright Act 1911, while repealing
earlier statues on the subject, was also
made applicable to all the British colonies
including India. In 1914, the Indian
Copyright Act was enacted which modified
some of the provisions of Copyright Act
1911 and added some new provisions to it
to make it applicable in India.
 It remained applicable in India until it was
replaced by the Copyright Act 1957.
 Copyright Law in India
 In India, the Copyright Act, 1957 ,
the Rules made there under and the
International Copyright Order, 1999
govern Copyright and neighbouring
rights. This Act has been amended six
times i.e1983,1984,1992,1994,1999
and most recently in 2012.The Act is
divided into 15 chapters with 79
sections.
 The Copyright Act,1957
 In harmony with the Berne Convention
1886 and the Universal Copyright
Convention 1952.
 Copyright office was established under
the control of a registrar of copyright.
 The registrar had certain powers like
entertaining and disposing of applications
for compulsory licenses and to inquire into
complaints of importation of infringing
copies.
 The Copyright Act,1957
 The Act for the first time made a provision
for the setting up of a Copyright Board.
 The exclusive right to communicate works
by a radio diffusion; the cinematograph film
was given a separate copyright; the term of
copyright protection was extended from 23
to 50 years.
 The right to produce a translation of a
work was made coextensive with other
rights arising out of copyright.
 The Copyright Act,1957
 Assignment of ownership and licensing
of copyright including compulsory
licensing in certain circumstances
 Rights of broadcasting organizations
 International copyright, Definition of
infringement of copyright
 Fair Use Provisions
 Civil, Criminal and Administrative
remedies
 The Copyright
Amendments Act,1983
 Section 32A was introduced for issuing
compulsory licences for reproduction of an
edition of literary, scientific or artistic work,
whether or not the work is Indian, for the
purposes of systematic instructional
activities where copies are not made
available in India or have not been put on
sale in India for a period of six months after
the expiration of certain prescribed periods
from the date of the first publication.
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1983
 Section 32A, Copyright Act 1957. The
periods prescribed are: (a) seven years
for work relating to poetry, fiction,
drama, music or art, (b) three years
for work relating to natural science,
physical science, mathematics or
technology and (c) five years for any
other work. The authority for granting
the license is the Copyright Board.
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1983
 Section 31A was inserted which provided that in
case of unpublished work where the author is
dead or unknown or owner of copyright cannot be
traced, any person wishing to publish material or
translation thereof may advertise his proposal
and apply to the Copyright Board for permission
which would grant such permission and fix an
appropriate royalty. The royalty could be
deposited in public account for specific period so
as to enable the owner of copyright or his heirs,
executors or the legal representatives to claim
such royalty at any time.
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1984
 There are three types of piracy: piracy of
printed word; of sound recordings; and of
cinema films. The object of pirates in all
such cases is to make money and avoid
payment of legitimate taxes and royalty. In
respect of books, it is estimated that 400-
500 titles are pirated every year in India
and on each of the pirated titles, the loss to
the government in the form of tax evasion.
 Video Films
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1984
 The amendment made infringement
of copyright cognizable and a non-
bailable offence.
 Video film‘ was added to the
definition of cinematograph film‘ and
computer programs‘ to the definition
of literary work‘ and a new definition
of duplicating equipment was also
inserted.
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1992

 The term of copyright protection

was extended from 23 to 50 years
which was again extended to 60
years in 1992
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1994
 After enactment of TRIPS Agreement
 It introduced protection for performers by
giving them a right to reproduce their live
performances by way of sound or video
recordings.
 Assignment of copyright by an author or
artist to protect the interests of both the
assignor and assignee and also for the
protection of computer programs,
cinematograph films and sound recordings.
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1994
 Sec.2.(q) "performance", in relation to
performer's right, means any visual or
acoustic presentation made live by one
or more performers;
 Sec.2.(qq) "performer' includes an
actor, singer, musician, dancer, acrobat,
juggler, conjurer, snake charmer, a
person delivering a lecture or any other
person who makes a performance;
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1994
 Copyright societies seeking to promote
effective administration of rights of the
authors, composers and other creative
artists.
 Sec.2. (ffa) of the Copyright Act,1957-
"composer', in relation to a musical work,
means the person who composes the
music regardless of whether he records it
in any form of graphical notation;
 The Copyright Amendment

Act,1999
This amendment increased the protection of performers
from 25 to 50 years as required by TRIPS. Rental right
was introduced in case of computer programs to
strengthen the right of reproduction of authors of
computer programs in accordance with WCT 1996.
 Sec.2. (ffb) of the Copyright Act,1957 "computer"
includes any electronic or similar device having
information processing capabilities;
 Sec.2.(ffc) of the Copyright Act."computer programme"
means a set of instructions expressed in words, codes,
schemes or in any other form, including a machine
readable medium, capable of causing a computer to
perform a particular task or achieve a particular result.
 The Copyright
Amendment Act,1999
 Section 42A was added whereby power
was given to the Central Government to
restrict the rights of foreign
broadcasting organization and
performers if it appears to the
government that such a foreign country
does not give or has not undertaken to
give adequate protection to the rights of
broadcasting organization or performer
of our country
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Quality and Originality
 Copyright is a right which subsists in a
number of different kinds of works, such
as literary, dramatic, musical or artistic
works, sound recording, and
cinematograph films.
 Section 14 of the Copyright Act,1957
defines ‘copyright’ means an exclusive
right to do or authorise the doing of any of
the works.
 Subject Matter of
 Literary WorkCopyright
 Sec.2(o) of the Copyright Act,1957- "literary
work" includes computer programmes, tables
and compilations including data bases.
 Sec.13.Works in which copyright subsists
 Section 16 of the Act, makes it clear that there
cannot be copyright which exist in any work
except as provided by the statute. There is no
common law copyright.
 Sec.22 of the Copyright Act- Life Plus Sixty
Years
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Ideas and opinions are not the subject
matter of copyright, but only the form in
which ideas and opinions are expressed.
 Copyright law is a negative right, which
prevents the copying of physical material
existing in the field of literature and arts.
The exclusive right is a negative right,
which is a right granted to the authors by
preventing others not to copy or
reproduce his work without permission
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Protection of expressions of ideas rather
than the idea themselves
 Must be fixed in any medium
 work must be original
 Copyright is granted to creative expression
 The originality relates to the expression of
thought by an author and the work alleged
to be copy of another should not be copied
from another work
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Gramophone Co. v.  Birender Bahadur
Pandey, AIR 1984 SC 667.
 “An artistic, literary or musical work is
the brainchild of the author, the fruit
of his labour and so, considered to be
his property. So highly it is prized by
all civilized nations that it is thought
worthy of protection by national laws
and international conventions.
 Case Law
 Penguin Books Ltd. Vs Mls India Book
Distributors-AIR 1985 DEL 29(35).
 Justice Rohtagi observed: "Copyright is a
property right, throughout the world
retarded as a form of property worthy of
special protection in ultimate public interest.
The law starts from a premise that protection
must be as long as broad possible and should
provide only those expectations, limitations
which are essential in public interest.'
 Periyar Self Respect Propaganga
Institution v. Periyar Dravidar
 Kazhagam
Whether 2009(41)
republication PTCof448
of the works Periyar by
the respondent will amount to infringement of
copyright works of the plaintiff association?
 In 1925 periyar started a Journal Kudi
Arasu(Peoples Rule)
 Puratchi(Revolution)
 Pagutharivu-(Rationalism)
 Priced Cheap and Printed in inexpensive paper
 Knowledge must be disseminated
 Sec.52(1)(m) Reproduction of in a newspaper and
magazine
University of London Press v University
Tutorial Press Ltd (1916) 2 Ch. D. 601

 “the work original does not mean that the work

must be the expression of original or inventive
thought. Copyright Acts in all the countries are
not concerned with the origin of idea, but with
the expression of thought and in the case of
‘literary work’ with the expression of thought in
print or writing. The originality which is required
related to the expression of the thought, but the
Act does not require that the expression must be
in an original or novel form, but that the work
must not be copied from another work that it
should originate from the author.”
 Macmillan and Co. v K & J.
CooperAIR 1924, P.C.75
 Lord Atkinson observed that, “the labour, skill and
capital of one man must not be appropriated by
another and if he expended sufficiently to impart to
the work some quality or character which the other
did not possess and which differentiates the end
result of the new work. By his skill and labour the
author brings in a work which is though not novel or
ingenious, but claimants original work which
originated from him and not copied. Hence, providing
others an opportunity to produce a work though with
the same result and though they are not the first in
the field, the work being independently made and was
original within the Act.”
Macmillan and Co. v K &
J. Cooper AIR 1924,
P.C.75
 Neither original thought nor original
research is essential for a literary work to
be original.
 Thus, it depends on the skill, labour
knowledge of the author.
 Originality can be claimed in
encyclopaedia, dictionaries, compilations,
gazetteers, almanacs, guide books, maps,
etc as they involve skill and labour in
compilation.
 Government of West
Bengal v Nitya Gopal

Basak 1985 Cr LJ202
If any person by pain and labour collected
and reduced into the form is sufficient to
constitute an original work, of which the
copyright would be protected.
 Another person might originate another
work in the same general form, provided
he did so from his own resources and
made the work he so originated a work of
his own by his own labour and industry
bestowed upon it
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Jagdish Prasad Vs Parmeshwar
Prasad, AIR 1966 PAT 33.
 Question papers set for the
examination
 Fatesh Singh Mehta Vs Singhal, AIR
1990 RAJ 8(14).
 Research theses and dissertations
prepared by students
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Blackwood Vs Parasuraman AIR 1959
MAD 410
 Madras High Court held that:
"translation of literary work is itself a
literary work and is entitled to copyright
protection; reproduction of publication
of translation without consent or license
of the owner of copyright in the original
would amount to infringement.
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 White v. Geroch, (1819) 2 B & Aid 298
 Publication- there shall be an 'issue of
work', not only the copies are to be
made but the copies must be issued to
the public, more clearly, issue for the
purposes of sale is not essential,
although no doubt, its reproductions
are issued for such a purpose which
would amount to a publication of work.
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Novello Vs Ludlow(1952) 12 CB 177

 There can be no publication of a literary,

dramatic, musical or artistic work, or of
record, if they exist in a single copy thereof.
To constitute publication, not only the copies
of the work or record must be made but they
must be issued to the public for any purposes
whatsoever, whether for sale or for any other
purposes. Communication of the work can
take place when the work is heard, seen or
otherwise enjoyed.
 Subject Matter of
 A.C. Sampath Copyright
Ayyangar V. Sarvashri Jamshed G.
Kanga & A. Palkhiwala and Messrs N.M. Tripathi
Kanga & A. Palkhiwala and Messrs N.M. Tripathi
Ltd -C.S. No. 350 of 1951.
 The plaintiff who was the author of the book 'The Indian
Income Tax Act' sued the defendants in the High Court
of Madras for infringement of his publication by another
book entitled 'The Law & Practice of Income-Tax' of
which the defendents no. 1 and 2 were joint authors and
the 3rd defendants for publishing the alleged infringing
copies. The defendents denied any act of piracy and
asserted that their book or compilation was an
independent effort. Dismissing the suit,
 A.C. Sampath Ayyangar V. Sarvashri
Jamshed G. Kanga & A. Palkhiwala and
Messrs N.M. Tripathi Ltd

 Panchapakesa Ayyar J., observed : A perusal

of the book (of defendants) has convinced me
that it will sell by its own merit. It was further
stated that though infringement is alleged on
the basis of common headings, common
conclusions, quoting of common extracts,
common criticism of sections, and common
mistakes yet that doesn't make out the case
since both the commentators had gone to the
common sources like the sections of the Act
or the Income Tax Manual.
 E.M. Foster V. A.N.

Parasuram
The respondent published a guide book to the novel
"A Passage to India" by E.M. Foster, which was
prescribed by the University of Madras as a text book
for students taking the B.A. degree. The guide was
styled as "E.M. Foster, A Passage to India, Everyman's
Guide". It contained an introduction which included
studies of the life and works of Foster, Foster as a
Novelist, the story in outline, the plot as analysed by
the Respondent's textual essays skillfully arranged,
sketches and character contrasts. It was held that the
guide was an independent creation and was not a
copyright infringement of the original novel.
 Lecture
 Lecture-U.K. Copyright Act 1956, Section 48
(1); Indian Copyright Act 1957, Section 2 (n).
 Copyright, however, can only subsist in
lecture if it is a literary work, i.e. a work
expressed in print or writing", and it would
appear, therefore, that there is still no
copyright in a mere extempore speech. It i s
submitted, however, that where a speech is
made from notes, it might be held that anyone
copying the speech was infringing the
copyright in the notes.
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 It is the creation of their mind, it is called the
intellectual property. Every intellectual
property, which adds to the cultural, social,
scientific and economic development of the
society, must be protected and encouraged.
 Sec.2. (h) of the Copyright Act,1957- "dramatic
work" includes any piece for 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;
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 In the English Copyright Act of 1956, 
dramatic work is defined to include “a
choreographic work or entertainment
in dumb show if reduced to writing in
the form in which the work or
entertainment is to be presented but
does not include a cinematograph
film as distinct from a scenario or
script for a cinematographic film
 Frankel v. Irwin 34 F (2d)
142.
 It was observed that piracy may also consist
in appropriating the action of a play without
any of the words. In order to constitute
infringement, the production on the stage
must tell the same story as the copyrighted
drama. If the production tells a different
story, or enacts another and different
sequences or events. If a substantial number
of incidents, scenes and episodes, in an
alleged infringing play are so nearly
identical, in detail
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Sec.2(p) of the Copyright Act,1957-
musical work" means a work
consisting of music and includes any
graphical notation of such work but
does not include any words or any
action intended to be sung, spoken
or performed with the music.
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 For a new song or other work, copyright
begins at the moment of fixation — when the
music and lyrics have been set down on paper,
recorded, or stored on a computer. Copyright
protects the musician even if the song is never
registered with the Copyright Office. 
 Sec.2 (ffa) of Copyright Act. "composer', in
relation to a musical work, means the person
who composes the music regardless of
whether he records it in any form of graphical
notation;
 I.P.R. Society v. E.I.M.P Association,
A.I.R. 1977 S.C.1443
 The Indian Performing Rights Society announced a
tariff of fees , charges and royalties for public
performance of composers of musical works and others
on 29 September , 1969. The litigation arose between
IPRS and the Exhibitors Association of India before the
Copyright Board.
 SC held that Under proviso to Section 17(b) , the owner
at whose instance the film is made become the first
owner of the copyright.
 The lyricist or composer cannot interfere with the
exclusive rights of the producer of the sound recording,
which includes the right to communicate the sound
recording to the public by way of radio transmission.
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Artistic Work-
 Sec.2(c) "artistic work" means- (i) a
painting, a sculpture, a drawing
(including a diagram, map, chart or
plan), an engraving or a photograph,
whether or not any such work
possesses artistic quality; (ii) work of
architecture;7 and (iii) any other
work of artistic craftsmanship.
 Subject Matter of
Copyright
 Sec.2.(f) "cinematograph film" means
any work of visual recording on any
medium produced through a process
from which a moving image may be
produced by any means and includes a
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;
 Producer
 Sec. 2. (uu) of Copyright Act.“Producer', in
relation to a cinematograph film or sound
recording, means a person who takes the
initiative and responsibility for making the
work;
 Ultimate authority to decide all works
 Fortune Films Ltd v. Dev Anand A.I.R. 1979
Bom 17.
 The copyright was denied to actor acting in
a film.
 Sound Recording
 Sec.2(xx) of the Copyright Act,1957.
"sound recording" means a
recording of sounds 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.
 Music Broadcast Private Limited v.
Indian Performing Right Society-
Bombay High Court, on 25th July 2011
 The Court upheld the rights of the music
companies over sound recordings, to the
exclusion of the lyricists and composers
whose works were the underlying materials
for the sound recording.
 while the lyricist and composer are
entitled to copyright in respect of their
work (literary and musical), the producer of
the sound recording is entitled to copyright
in respect of the sound recording.
 Legal Issues
 The Singer and Music composer have
together produced generation spanning hits
including Keladi Kanmani,Illaya Nilla, Nalam
Vaazha Ennalum,Pothivacha Malligai
Mottu,Kadhalin Deepam Ondru, and Enna
Satham Intha Neram.
 The Madras High Court had in 2015,given an
injunction against four music labels from
monetising Illayaraaja’s musical works . The
composer had said that he held the exclusive
right to all his songs.
 Sound Recording
 Under Section 17 (b), if the cinematograph
film producer commissions a composer of
music or a lyricist for reward or valuable
consideration to composing music or lyric for
the purpose of making his cinematograph
film, the producer of the film or sound
recording, becomes the first owner of the
copyright therein and no copyright subsists
in the composer of the lyric or music, unless
there is a contract to the contrary.
Radio Today Broadcasting Ltd v Indian
Performing Rights Society (2007 (34)
PTC 174 (Cal))

 The Hon‟ble Calcutta High Court, in the course

of disposing an interim application, was seized
with the question of whether “Radio Today”
would be obliged to pay royalty or licence fee to
Indian Performing Rights Society (a society of
lyricists and composers), if songs, whose lyrics
were penned and music composed by the
members of the society, are broadcast through
the radio station, in addition to the licence fees
paid to the producers (Phonographic
Performance Limited, a society of producers).
Radio Today Broadcasting Ltd v Indian
Performing Rights Society (2007 (34)
PTC 174 (Cal))
 The Court ruled against “Radio Today” and
held that unless it can be shown that the
members of Indian Performing Rights Society
had assigned their exclusive rights to the
producers by way of an agreement, Indian
Performing Rights Society is entitled to claim
royalties from “Radio Today”. Section 14(e)
(iii), grants the producers of sound
recordings, the exclusive right to
communicate the sound recording to public
or authorize any other person to do so
 Authorship and Ownership
 Authorship of Copyright
of any work confers the author the
primary ownership of the copyright over his
work.
 The ownership of the copyright does not
always signify that the owner is the author of
the work.
 Author enjoys moral rights on his creation and
owner of the copyright owns the economic
rights for exploiting the copyright.
 Sec.17 of the Copyright Act. The author of a
work is the first owner of the copyright existing
in the work.
 Authorship and
Ownership of Copyright
 Sec.2(z) of the Copyright Act,1957-Joint
Authorship. In the work of joint
authorship, the contribution of each
author associated in creating the work
is not separately identifiable from others.
 In collective work the respective
contributions are distinguishable making
each a separate independent work.
 Authorship and
Ownership of Copyright
 Work Produced in course of employment
 In a suit of infringement of copyright particularly
if the employer claims the first ownership of the
work done by his employee, the proof of
employment assume importance.
 Ram Singh & Others v. UT Chandigarh & Othrs
2004 (1) SCC 126
 Control is one of the most important test
 Power to select and dismiss to pay remuneration,
deduct insurance contribution, organise the work,
supply tools and materials.
 Authorship and
Ownership of Copyright
 Rupendra Kashyam v. J.Wan Publishing
House(P) Ltd.1994 (53)DLT 166.
 In absence of any agreement between the
paper setter and Central Board of
Secondary Education to the effect that the
CBSE will be the first owner of the
copyright of the questions set by the
paper-setters, the CBSE cannot claim first
ownership of the copyright over the
questions.
 Authorship and
Ownership of Copyright
 Public Lecture
 Stevenson Jordan v. Macdonald &
Evans(1952) 69 RPC 10
 Public lecture given by the accountant-employee
taking the help of libraries and secretarial
assistance of the secretaries of the company, the
lectures were considered ,neither prepared nor
delivered under the order of the company. The
copyright over the lectures therefore owned by
the employee-accountant not the company.
 Authorship and
Ownership of Copyright
 Byrne v. Statist Co(1914) 1 K.B.
622.
 When an employee creates an work
in his own time and not in the course
of employment, the employee
concerned is the first owner of the
copyright on the work.
 Authorship and
 Ownership
Computer of Copyright
Program or Software
 Computer program comes under the literary
works and therefore the authorship of the
software program will remain with the person
who created the software unless the program is
created by him not in the course of employment
under another person.
 Tata Consultancy Services v. State of Andhra
Pradesh 2006(33) PTC 652 (SC)
 Originator of the software holds the incorporeal
rights to it.
 Moral Rights
 Sec.57 of the Copyright Act,1957.The
author of a work has the right to claim
authorship of the work and to restrain or
claim damages in respect of any distortion,
mutilation, modification or other act in
relation to the work, if such distortion,
mutilation, modification or other act is
prejudicial to his honour or reputation.
Moral rights are available to the authors
even after the economic rights are assigned.
 KPM Sundaram v/s M/s Rattan
Prakashan Mandir, AIR 1983 Del. 461
(468, 469)
 The plaintiff, an author of certain books
instituted the suit against the defendants
for injunction, restraining them from
printing, publishing and selling the
specified books, rendition of accounts for
the illegal gains made by the defendants
for all unauthorized publications, and,
for damages under the provisions of
sections 55 and 57 of the Act.
 KPM Sundaram v/s M/s Rattan
Prakashan Mandir, AIR 1983 Del. 461
(468, 469)
 The plaintiff claimed that the defendants mutilated
and distorted the original works of the plaintiff by
publishing various books in modified form in gross
violation of the plaintiff’s copyright. The plaintiff
alleged that the defendants had changed the original
works’ title and made a distortion and mutilation of
the plaintiff’s work prejudicial to the plaintiff’s
reputation. The plaintiff claimed that he never gave
any authority to the defendants to print and publish
the books in that manner. The court granted injunction
restraining the defendants from printing, publishing
and selling the goods written by the plaintiff .
Smt. Mannu Bhandari, Appellant v.
Kala Vikas Pictures Pvt. Ltd. AIR
1987 Delhi 13
 The court observed that “section 57 lifts the
author’s status beyond the material gains of
copyright and gives it a special status. An
author’s right to restrain distortion etc. of his
work is not limited to a case of literary
reproduction of his work. The restraint order in
the nature of injunction under section 57 can be
passed even in cases where a film is produced
based on the author’s novel. The language of
section 57 is of the widest amplitude and cannot
be restricted to ‘literary’ expression only.
Smt. Mannu Bhandari, Appellant v. Kala
Vikas Pictures Pvt. Ltd. AIR 1987 Delhi
13
 Visual and audio manifestations are directly covered.
The court observed that by reading the contract with
section 57, it is obvious that modifications, which are
permissible, are such modifications, which do not
convert the film into an entirely new version from the
original novel. The modifications should also not
distort or mutilate the original novel. The fact that
Mannu Bhandari is the author of the story will be
published in all the credits. This is for giving due
recognition to the author’s reputation.” The court
therefore, directed certain modifications and
deletions to the film before screening it.
Amar Nath Sehgal V. Union of India & Anr
2005 (30) PTC 253
 Mr. Amar Nath Sehgal is the world-renowned
sculpturist and has been conferred with several
awards for his beautiful creations and contribution to
the Indian heritage. In the year 1957, the
Government of India commissioned Mr. Sehgal for
the creating bronze mural for the most prominent
International Convention Hall in the Capital of the
Country. The Bronze sculpture of about 140ft. span
and 40ft. sweep took five years to complete and was
placed on the wall of the Lobby in the Convention
hall. This embellishment on a national architecture
became a part of the Indian art heritage.
 Amar Nath Sehgal V. Union of
India & Anr 2005 (30) PTC 253
 The background of the present dispute was set in
the year 1979 when government pulled down the
sculpture from the walls of ‘Vigyan Bhawan’ and
dumped it in the storeroom. When Mr. Sehgal
came to know of this ill treatment, he made
representations to the government authorities for
restoration of the mural. Unfortunately, all his
pleas fell on deaf ears. Aggrieved by the apathy
of the government officials, Mr. Seghal filed a
petition in the Delhi High Court for recognition
and enforcement of his rights on the mural.
 Amar Nath Sehgal V. Union of
India & Anr 2005 (30) PTC 253
 Mr. Seghal contended that the mural created
by him was a part of the national heritage
and hence was valuable not only for him but
for the entire country. The mutilation of the
work was prejudicial to his reputation as it
reduced the volume of the corpus of his
work. He further argued that where the right
to integrity is violated, the remedy is not
limited to injunction or damages. The author
has the right to preserve the mutilated work
as well. 
 Amar Nath Sehgal V. Union of
India & Anr 2005 (30) PTC 253
 "The Court passed mandatory injunction
against the UOI directing it to return the
mural to Mr. Sehgal within two weeks
from the date of judgment. Court passed a
declaration transferring all the rights over
the mural from UOI to Mr. Sehgal and an
absolute right to recreate the mural and
sell the same. The Court also granted
damages to the tune of Rs.5 lacs and cost
of suit to Mr. Sehgal against UOI.
Neha Bhasin vs Anand Raj Anand And Anr. on
20 April, 2006

 The plaintiff (Neha Bhasin), a singer, claims that her

voice has been used by the defendants for the three
versions1 of the song "ek look ek look" in the hindi
feature film "Aryan " unbreakable" produced by the
defendant No. 2 (Poonam Khubani). What is more, the
plaintiff alleges, the defendant No. 2, in connivance
with the music director (defendant No. 1-Anand Raaj
Anand), has shown herself to be the singer Along with
the defendant No. 2. The plaintiff has been shown as a
backup vocalist in all the three versions of "ek look ek
look". The credits for the three versions are apparent
from the jacket/inlay card of the audio compact disc of
"Aryan unbreakable" 
 Neha Bhasin vs Anand
Raj Anand And Anr. on

20 April, 2006
 The plaintiff is entitled to an interim order
restraining the defendants, their dealers,
distributors, stockists and all other persons
acting on their behalf from in any manner using,
selling, distributing, exhibiting, advertising the
motion picture as well as cassettes, CDs,
promos Page 1756 of the film "Aryan -
Unbreakable" containing the song "Ek Look Ek
Look" in any of the three versions as contained
in the Original CD without displaying the name
of the plaintiff as lead female singer. 
Assignment and Licences
 The Copyright confers a bundle of exclusive
rights to its owner of copyright and he enjoys
unrestricted authority to deal each right
under the copyright individually or wholly.
 Sec.2. (d) "author' means,- (i) in relation to a literary
or dramatic work, the author of the work; (ii) in
relation to a musical work, the composer; (iii) in
relation to an artistic work other than a photograph,
the artist; (iv) in relation to a photograph, the
person taking the photograph; (v) in relation to a
cinematograph or sound recording the producer
Assignment and Licences
 Sec.2. (j) of the Copyright
Act,1957-"exclusive licence" means a
licence which confers on the licensee or
on the licensee and persons authorised
by him, to the exclusion of all other
persons (including the owner of the
copyright), any right comprised in the
copyright in a work, and "exclusive
licensee" shall be construed accordingly.
Assignment and Licences
 Sec. 18 of the Copyright Act,1957. Assignment
of copyright. -(1) The owner of the copyright in
an existing work or the prospective owner of
the copyright in a future work may assign to
any person the copyright either wholly or
partially and either generally or subject to
limitations and either for the whole term of the
copyright or any part thereof: Provided that in
the case of the assignment of copyright in any
future work, the assignment shall take effect
only when the work comes into existence.
Assignment and Licences
Sec.19.Mode of assignment.- (1) No assignment of the

copyright in any work shall be valid unless it is in writing
signed by the assignor or by his duly authorised agent. (2)
The assignment of copyright in any work shall identify
such work, and shall specify the rights assigned and the
duration and territorial extent of such assignment. (3)
The assignment of copyright in any work shall also specify
the amount of royalty payable, if any, to the author or his
legal heirs during the currency of the assignment and the
assignment shall be subject to revision, extension or
termination on terms mutually agreed upon by the parties.
 If the period of assignment is not stated, it shall be
deemed to be five years from the date of assignment.
Assignment and Licences
 Sec.19.A.Disputes with respect to
assignment of copyright
 (1) If an assignee fails to make sufficient
exercise of the rights assigned to him, and such
failure is not attributable to any act or omission
of the assignor, then, the Copyright Board may,
on receipt of a complaint from the assignor and
after holding such inquiry as it may deem
necessary, revoke such assignment.
Assignment and Licences
 Sec.21. Right of author to relinquish
copyright.-(1) The author of a work
may relinquish all or any of the
rights comprised in the copyright in
the work by giving notice in the
prescribed form to the Registrar of
Copyrights
Assignment and Licences
 Sec.30.Licences by owners of
copyright.- The owner of the
copyright in any existing work or the
prospective owner of the copyright
in any future work may grant any
interest in the right by licence in
writing signed by him or by his duly
authorised agent:
Assignment and Licences
Sec.31. Compulsory licence in works withheld from

public.-(1) If at any time during the term of copyright in
any Indian work which has been published or performed
in public, a complaint is made to the Copyright Board
that the owner of copyright in the work- (a) has refused
to republish or allow the republication of the work or
has refused to allow the performance in public of the
work, and by reason of such refusal the work is withheld
from the public.
 (2) Where two or more persons have made a complaint
under sub-section (1), the licence shall be granted to the
complainant who in the opinion of the Copyright Board
would best serve the interests of the general public.
Assignment and Licences
 Sec.31A.Compulsory licence in
unpublished Indian works.-(1) Where, in
the case of an Indian work referred to in
sub-clause (iii) of clause (a) of section 2,
the author is dead or unknown or cannot
be traced, or the owner of the copyright
in such work cannot be found, any
person may apply to the Copyright Board
for a licence to publish such work or a
translation thereof in any language.
Assignment and Licences
 Sec.32.Licence to produce and
publish translations
 Any person may apply to the
Copyright Board for license to
produce and publish a translation of
literary of dramatic work in any
language after the period of sevan
years from the first publication of the
work.
Registration of Copyright
 Sections 44 to 50 of the Copyright Act,1957
 No compulsory registration-It is not
mandatory.
 Mishra Bandhu Karyalaya Case AIR 1970 MP
261
 The High Court held that under sections 13
and 45, the registration of book with the
Registrar of Copyrights is condition
precedent for acquiring copyright in regard
to the work.
Registration of Copyright
 M/S Manoj Cini Production v.
A.Sundersan AIR 1976 Mad 22.
 The Court held that registration is
not condition precedent for copyright
or acquisition of ownership thereof.
The settled legal position is that
copyright exists independent of the
fact that whether it is registered or
not under the Act.
Registration of Copyright
 Sec. 48. Register of Copyrights to be prima
facie evidence of particulars entered therein.
-The Register of Copyrights shall be prima
facie evidence of the particulars entered
therein and documents purporting to be
copies of any entries therein, or extracts
therefrom certified by the Registrar of
Copyrights and sealed with the seal of the
Copyright Office shall be admissible in
evidence in all courts without further proof
or production of the original.
 Infringement of

Copyright
Unauthorized Use of the copyright right of
the author/owners
 Sec. (m) "infringing copy" means,- (i) in
relation to a literary, dramatic, musical or
artistic work, a reproduction thereof otherwise
than in the form of a cinematographic film; (ii)
in relation to a cinematographic film, a copy of
the film made on any medium by any means;
(iii) in relation to a sound recording, any other
recording embodying the same sound
recording, made by any means;
 Infringement of
Copyright
 Sec.51. When copyright infringed.
-Copyright in a work shall be deemed to
be infringed- (a) when any person,
without a licence granted by the owner
of the copyright or the Registrar of
Copyrights under this Act or in
contravention of the conditions of a
licence so granted or of any condition
imposed by a competent authority under
this Act-
 Forms of Infringement
 (1) Primary Infringement
 When copyright is infringed directly, the
persons involved in such acts will be guilty
of primary infringement.
 Rough practical Test- “What is worth
copying is prima facie worth protecting”.
 The University of London case emphasized
copy of any part of the work in which
copyright exists will amount to an act of
infringement.
 Forms of Infringement
 Lay observers Test or Lay Recognition
Test
 It determines the infringement of
drawing, design or artistic work
emphasize whether to the persons who are
not experts in relation to objects of that
description , the object appears to be
reproduction.
 Artistic Work-Visual appearance or Look-
like factor
 Forms of Infringement
 Casual Connection Test
 The casual connection test demands that the plaintiff
alleging infringement must establish that the work of the
infringer was derived from the work of the claimant ,
which may not be directly copied from the original work
of claimant.
 If the infringing work contains same mistakes or
omissions of the original work, it would be
presumed to be copy of original work.
 Burden of proof lies upon the defendant to
establish that his work does not infringe the
original copyright work.
 Infringement
 Subconscious Copying
 The copying could occur
subconsciously where a person
reads, sees or hears a work, forgets
about it but then reproduces it,
genuinely believing it to be his own."
In such a case, proof of copying is
said to depend on "a number of
composite elements.
 Infringement
 Substantial Copying
 Copying of substantial part or small
part of original work may amount to
infringement but no precise definition
could be given as to what amounts to
copying of the substantial part.
 It has to be determined on the basis
of fact of each case and degree of
copying.
 Infringement

 Indirect Copying
 Work may be copied by imitating a
copy of it.
 If a novel is turned into a play, which is
in turn converted into a ballet, the same
will apply.
 Substantial part of it copied
 R.G.Anand v M/S Delux Films Ltd. AIR
1978 SC 1613
 Infringement of
copyright in a film
 Sec.51 of the Copyright Act,1957
 Without permission(licence) using the copyrighted works
of others
 R.G.Anand v. Delux Films Ltd AIR 1978 SC 1614
 Hum Hindustani, New Delhi
 There can be no copyright in idea
 Where the same idea is being deployed in
 A Play is a dramatic work under Section 2(h) of the Copyright Act, 1957.
The movie will be an ‘adaptation’ as per Section 2(a)(i). For a dramatic
work, making an adaptation is a statutory right provided under Section 14
(a)(vi) of the Copyright Act, 1957. A movie which copies a play will be an
infringement as per Section 51 unless excluded by Section 52.
 Infringement of
Copyright
 Sec.63. Offence of infringement of copyright or
other rights conferred by this Act. Any person
who knowingly infringes or abets the
infringement of- (a) the copyright in a work, or
(b) any other right conferred by this Act, [except
the right conferred by section 53A] [shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which
shall not be less than six months but which may
extend to three years and with fine which shall
not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which
may extend to two lakh rupees :
 Remedies


Civil Remedies
 Criminal Remedies

 Administrative
Remedies
 Sec.63B. Knowing use of infringing copy of computer
programme to be an offence.
 Any person who knowingly makes use on a computer of
an infringing copy of a computer programme shall be
punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not
be less than seven days but which may extend to three
years and with fine which shall not be less than fifty
thousand rupees but which may extend to two lakh
rupees: Provided that where the computer programme has
not been used for gain or in the course of trade or
business, the court may, for adequate and special reasons
to be mentioned in the judgment, not impose any sentence
of imprisonment and may impose a fine which may extend
to fifty thousand rupees."
 Sec.64. Power of police to seize infringing copies .
-(1)Any police officer, not below the rank of a sub-
inspector, may, if he is satisfied that an offence
under section 63 in respect of the infringement of
copyright in any work has been, is being, or is
likely to be, committed, seize without warrant, all
copies of the work, and all plates used for the
purpose of making infringing copies of the work,
wherever found, and all copies and plates so
seized shall, as soon as practicable, be produced
before a Magistrate.
 Taking Cognizance
 Sec. 70. Cognizance of offences. - No
court inferior to that of a
Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial
Magistrate of the first class] shall try
any offence under this Act.

 Civil Remedies
 Sec. 55. Civil remedies for infringement
of copyright. - (1) Where copyright in
any work has been infringed, the owner
of the copyright shall, except as
otherwise provided by this Act, be
entitled to all such remedies by way of
injunction, damages, accounts and
otherwise as are or may be conferred
by law for the infringement of a right :
 Civil Remedies
 If the defendant proves that at the date of
the infringement he was not aware and had
no reasonable ground for believing that
copyright subsisted in the work, the plaintiff
shall not be entitled to any remedy other
than an injunction in respect of the
infringement and a decree for the whole or
part of the profits made by the defendant by
the sale of the infringing copies as the court
may in the circumstances deem reasonable.
 Civil Remedies
 The costs of all parties in any proceedings in
respect of the infringement of copyright shall be
in the discretion of the court.
 Sec.62. Jurisdiction of court over matters arising
under this Chapter. - (1) Every suit or other civil
proceeding arising under this Chapter in respect
of the infringement of copyright in any work or
the infringement of any other right conferred by
this Act shall be instituted in the district court
having jurisdiction.
 Civil Remedies
 Sec. 61. Owners of copyright to be party
to the proceeding. - (1) In every civil suit
or other proceeding regarding
infringement of copyright instituted by an
exclusive licensee, the owner of the
copyright shall, unless the court otherwise
directs, be made a defendant and where
such owner is made a defendant, he shall
have the right to dispute the claim of the
exclusive licensee.
 Civil Remedies
 Srimagal and Co v. Books (India)
Pvt.Ltd.AIR 1973 Mad 49.
 The damages is the second form of
civil remedy against infringement.
 But the loss cannot be assessed on
the basis of both , the claimant has
an option to claim either damages or
profits he cannot have both.
 Anton Piller Order
 Anton Piller order was originated from the
decision in Anton Piller K.G. V.
Manufacturing Process Limited (1976) 1
Ch.55.
 The order enables the owner of the
copyright to enter into premises where the
offending materials are kept and remove
them for the production at the time of trial.
 To obtain the order the plaintiff is to
establish prima facie case.
 Groundless Threat of
Legal Proceedings
 The groundless threat of instituting
legal proceeding to any person with any
alleged infringement of copyright,
constitute the ground on which the
person aggrieved by such threat is
entitled to seek legal remedy in the form
of obtaining injunction against the
continuance of the legal threat and
recover damages from the person
threating in case he suffers any loss.
Administrative Remedies
 Administrative remedies consist of
moving the Registrar of copyrights to ban
the import of infringing copies
into India when
India the infringement is by way
of such importation and the delivery of the
confiscated infringing copies to the owner
of the copyright and seeking the delivery.
 Sec.53.Importation of infringing copies.
 The Customs Act,1962