Assignment, Paper-i, Copyright

8/6/2019 Assignment, Paper-i, Copyright

1/20

1

THE INDIAN LAW INSTITUTE

SEMESTER ASSIGNMENT

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS-I

PAPER CODE-004

Name of Student: Sourav Mandal

Class: LL. M. (Two Year Programme), 2nd Semester

Roll No.: 06/LLM/09

______________________

Title of assignment: Permitted Acts in

relation to Copyright


2/20

2

CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................03

II. COMMON LAW EXCEPTIONS............................................................................04

III. EXCEPTIONS TO THE INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT UNDER THE

INDIAN LAW.......................................................................................................05

a. Fair Dealing with Certain Worksb. Permitted Reproductionsc. Permitted Publicationsd. Permitted Performances and Recitationse. Exceptions in respect of Sound Recordings and Cinematographic Filmsf. Exceptions for Library Useg. Permitted Use of Artistic Worksh. Permitted Uses of Computer Programmesi. Permitted Broadcasting

IV. BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................. ..............................20


3/20

3

Permitted Acts in relation to Copyright- An Assignment

__________________________________________________________________________________

The major premises behind the rationale of the copyright laws are to enable the author to

exclude everyone and anyone in the society from copying the work of the author without his

permission. But in certain circumstances it is possible; one of such circumstances is fair

usage of the works. Major issues here are, what amounts to fair use, or to what extent of

copying, the usage remains fair. The doctrine of fair dealing is being included in the

copyright framework to satisfy the untoward public interest and give the masses, their

legitimate right of enhancing their personality and character, which in turn leads to the

further advancement of the society. For example, the work of a author is published in the

form of a book, in such a case, anyone who is desirous in gathering the knowledge of that

work, will have to do that, by paying a particular sum of money. This means that, knowledge

and education is the exclusive domain of the haves, who are capable of buying suchknowledge. But if it is so, it is wrong and the same cannot be justified by any parameter or

notions of law and justice.

I. INTRODUCTIONTHE BASIC idea behind having permitted uses, under the Copyright Law, is to strike a

balance between the interests of the intellectual on one side, and the general masses, i.e. the

beneficiaries of the intellectual work, on the other side. So, at certain areas it is the masses,

which have to shrink their interests and give way to the copyrighted owner of a particular

work and vice versa.

Any society consists of a mosaic of various diversities, largely classified under two categories

for the purposes of intellectual property law. It is a inherent and inevitable fact of any society

that, it is divided into two classes, first, the class of the intellectuals (who produce or create

various kinds of works which have the potential of forming a new opinion or making some

difference in the way of the already existing notions of the society) and secondly, the rest of

the people, i.e. the general masses who are not doing anything like the former. Since, the

copyright laws have been enacted, so that the legitimate interests of the authors of the

following categories of works can be protected:

1. Original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works,2. Cinematograph films and


4/20


5/20

5

The concept of public interest depends upon public policy of the state. These are issues which

never remain static or stagnant to any geographical boundaries, and are henceforth bound to

change time and again from society to society. For example, in the US courts are of the view

that, public has an over-riding interest in the prominent public figures6.

III. EXCEPTIONS TO THE INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT UNDER THEINDIAN LAW

Copyright as such is exclusionary or a negative form of right. But there are certain works

which do not amount to infringement of copyright, even when they are used, without

authorisation from the copyright owner. These are the works which are provided statutory

immunity. So, a copyrighted work can be used broadly in the following ways:

1. By taking the permission/licence from the copyright holder, or2. By paying adequate/requisite compensation to the copyright owner, or3. Without taking permission from the copyright holder, in case the nature and extent of

such usage of the copyrighted work is a fair use, i.e. if it falls within the ambit of

Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957 7.

In case of the former two options, the scope and extent of the usage of the copyrighted work

depends upon the discretion of the copyright holder, as he is supposed to take such a decision.In case of the later, there is no need to take any permission from anyone for the usage of the

copyright work, provided that, the scope and extent of the usage of the copyrighted work falls

within the statutory limitations prescribed by the Section 52 of the Act. This kind of a usage

is known as fair use or fair deal or permitted use. But since section 52 also comprises of

language, therefore the words are subject to the judicial interpretation.

Such provisions are enacted for the purposes of balancing the rights of owners with the

society as a whole. The Berne Convention8

also provides the right of reproduction of

protected works in special cases, provided the following two requisites are satisfied:

1. The reproduction does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work, and6Rosemant Enterprises Incorp. v. Randon HouseIncorp., 1966 IInd CirF366; Times Incorporation v. Bernard

Gees Association, 1968 F 293 Supp 130, the court justified defendants unauthorised duplication of several

flames of a film called Zarpharder in its magazine regarding the assassination of John F Kennedy.7Hereinafter called the Act.

8 Article 9(2) bis


6/20

6

2. Such reproduction does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of theauthor.

Now, what amounts to the violation of the legitimate interests of the author depends upon the

legislative and the judicial thinking of a state. Only if the national law chooses to disregard

one or both of the conditions laid down by the Article 9(2) bis would the member country be

in the breach of the Convention9.

Permitted usage of the copyrighted works is prescribed under section 52 of the Act and the

same can be understood under the following heads:

FAIR DEALING WITH CERTAIN WORKS

The expression fair dealing is never defined in the Act, except explanation to the Section

52(1) (b) which states that the, publication of a compilation of addresses or speeches

delivered in public is not a fair dealing of that work within the meaning of this clause.

9 S.M. Stewart, International Copyright and Neighbouring Rights 122 (Butterworths, London, 2nd Edn., 1989)

Certain works not to be infringement of copyright

a fair

dealingwith

literary,dramatic,musical

andartisticworks

permitedreproduct

ions

permitedpublicatio

ns

permitedperforma

nce andrecitation

exception

s inrespect of

soundrecording

s andcinemato

graphfilms

exceptions for

libraryuse

permiteduse ofartisticworks

reconstruction ofwork of

architecture

permiteduse of

computerprograms

permitedbroadcast

ing


7/20

7

Throughout all these years of the existence of the doctrine of fair dealing, in the world laws,

it has been almost impossible to draw a hard jacket formula to restrict or define the scope and

extent ofFair Dealing. The Justice Hand of the 2nd Circuit Court, in the US has described the

doctrine of fair use as the most troublesome in the whole law ofcopyright 10. InHubbard

v. Vesper11, Lord Denning explained fair dealing as;

You must first consider the number and extent of the quotations and

extracts. Are they altogether too many and too long to be fair? Then you must

consider the use made of them. If they are used as a basis for comment, criticism or

review that may be a fair dealing. If they are used to convey the same information as

the author for a rival purpose, they may be unfair. Next you must consider the

proportions. To take long extracts and make short comments may be unfair. But

short extracts and long comments may be fair. Other considerations may come to

mind also. But after all is said or done, it is all a matter of impression.

The basis of the doctrine of fair dealing or fair use is to allow the public to reproduce or

copy some portions of copyrighted works for the purposes of research, private study,

criticism, news reporting, teaching, review etc12.

The Fair Dealing with literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works for the following

purposes does not constitute an infringement:

1. PRIVATE USE INCLUDING RESEARCH: Section 52 (1)(a)(i) of the Actprovides private use of any literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works for any kind

of private use or research work. Now, what kind of works fall under the ambit of

private use or research works is for the courts to define and interpret. The Oxford

English Dictionary defines research as, a search or investigation directed to the

discovery of some fact by careful consideration or study of subject; a course of critical

or scientific inquiry13

. The term private use is said to include, study. The Federal

Court of Australia, in De Garis v. Neville Jeffress Pidler Pvt. Ltd14

defined study as,

the application of mind to the acquisition of knowledge, as by reading, investigation

or reflection; a particular course of effort to acquire knowledge; a thorough

10Deller v. Samuel Goldwyn, Inc., 104 F.2d 661 (2nd Cir. 1939)11

(1972) 2 QB 8412Supra note 313

Oxford English Dictionary, vol VIII14 (1990) 18 IPR 291


8/20

examination or analysis of a particular subject. In Blackwood and Sons Ltd. v. AN

Parasuraman15, the Madras High Court held that, dealing with a work for private

study is such a dealing that does not involve any publication. Copinger states that,

private study covers only the case of a student copying out of a book for his own use,

but not the circulation of copies among other students16.

In Williams & Wilkins Co v United States17

the court held that it was fair use for the

defendant to photocopy articles from plaintiffs medical journals for distribution to

medical researchers because the copyright owner has not shown that it was or would

be, substantially harmed by the practice.

The test to determine, what amounts to fair use, is to find out whether the use is likely

to harm the potential market or the value of the copyrighted work.18 In Ashdown v.

Telegraph Group Ltd19

., the court laid down the following test:

The authors suggest that the success or failure of the defence depends upon

three factors: (1) whether the alleged fair dealing is in commercial competition

with the owners exploitation of work, (2) whether the work has already been

published or otherwise exposed to public and (3) the amount and importance

of the work taken.

2.

CRIT

IC

ISM

SOR RE

VIEW: Section 52 (1)(a)(ii) of the Act puts criticisms or

review of any literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work under the category of fair

use. If one has to criticise or review the work of someone, then the critic has to

inevitably use some of the extracts or use certain substantial part of someones work.

The reviewer or critic is not liable to for infringement, if he uses the extracts without

permission from the author, i.e. the copyrighted owner. In the UK, under the section

30(i) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 198820

the protection provided to the

critics or reviewers is subject to a condition that, he/she has to acknowledge the

15 AIR 1959 Mad 41016

Kevin Garnett, QC; Gillian Davies et. al. (eds.) , Copinger & Skone James on Copyright 773 (Sweet andMaxwell, 15th Ed. 2009)17 487 F.2d 1345(1973)18

Civic Chandran v Amini Amma 1996 Patent and Trademark Reporter 142; also held the same inHubbard v

Vosper(1972) 2 QB 84 (CA); Sony Corporation v Universal City Studios,Inc 464 US 417 (1984)19

(2001) 4 All ER 66620Hereinafter referred as CDPA, 1988.


9/20

9

source of the extract that he/she is using while criticising or reviewing a particular

work.

The objective of this provision is to protect a reviewer or a commentator who wants to

use extracts from a work to illustrate his/her view, criticism, review or comment. So,

the amount and extent of fair dealing varies from the facts and circumstances of

various cases, as what is fair in one case, may be unfair in another. In Syndicate of

Press, University of Cambridge v. Kasturi Lal & Sons21, the Delhi High Court

observed that, the verbatim lifting of the text to the extent of copying the complete set

of exercise and the key to such exercises in no manner be termed as review, criticism

or guide to the original work.

3. REPORTING OF CURRENT EVENTS:The Section 52(1)(b) excludes reportingby of current events by journalists or by normal citizens in a newspaper, magazine or

similar periodical, or by broadcast or a cinematograph film or by means of

photographs as outside the purview of infringing works.

To be a part of this exception, the events reported must be of current origin and not a

matter of history. The exception is only limited to the extent of simple reporting of

news and not to any kind of editorial writing or any form of sensational reporting

for that matter.

The doctrine of fair use is used as an affirmative defence and it is applied once it is

established that the defendants work is, in fact substantially similar to the plaintiffs. It is an

extraordinary flexible doctrine in the sense that its application typically turns on the particular

facts in issue22

.

21 (2006) 32 PTC 487 (Del.)22

Dr. Alka chawla, Copyright and Related Rights: National andInternational Perspectives 138 (Macmillan,

New Delhi 2005)


10/20

10

PERMITED REPRODUCTIONS

The following reproduction of work without the authorisation of the copyright owner is not

infringement:

1. The reproduction of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work for the purpose of ajudicial proceeding or for the purpose of a report of a judicial proceeding.

23

Although the Act doesnt define, judicial proceedings. In the absence of any

definition, this term may be given a wider meaning and it may include proceedings

before any court, tribunal, enquiry commission or a person vested with the powers to

hear, receive and examine evidence on oath24

.

InEastern Book Co. v. Navin J. Desai25

the court held that:

A work which is made or published under the direction or control of any court,

tribunal or judicial authority in India is a government work. Under section 52(1)(q),

the reproduction, publication of any judgment or order of a court, tribunal or judicial

authority shall not constitute infringement of copyright of the government in these

works. It is thus clear that, it is open to everybody to reproduce and publish the

government work including the judgment or order of the court. However, if a person

by the application of his sheer judgment and skill has produced commentaries on the

judgement of the court, then it is entitled to copyright protection, because it is his

original literary work.

The orders and judgments of a court do not have any copyright, but it does not mean

that, anyone can make a copy of that, merely on the ground that, he has published it at

the first instance26

.

2. The reproduction or publication of a literary, dramatic, musical and artistic worksprepared by the secretariat of a legislature or where the legislature consists of two

houses, by the secretariat of either house of the legislature, exclusively for the use of

the members of the legislature.27

3. The reproduction of any literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work in a certifiedcopy made or supplied in accordance with any law for the time being in force.

28

4. The reproduction of a literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work29:23 Section 52(1)(c) of the Act24Supra note 325

2001 (21) PTC 57 (Del)26Supra. Note 1027

Section 52(1)(d) of the Act28 Section 52(1)(e) of the Act


11/20

11

a. By a teacher to the pupil in the course of instruction;b. As a part of the questions to be answered in an examination;c. In answers to such questions.

The Act does not define, teacher and pupil. So, it needs to be interpreted broadly and

the same depends and varies from case to case. But it simply describes a relationship

based on good faith between a person, teaching to a set of student(s) who receive such

instructions.

5. The reproduction in a newspaper or a magazine or other periodical of an article onthe current economic, political, social or religious topics, unless the author of the

article has expressly reserved to himself the right of such reproduction.30

The reason for having this permitted use in the Act is to make more utilisation of the

diminishing use of an article on the current topic. However, the Act takes care of the

authors interest by providing that where the author has reserved to himself the right

to reserve the article, n one else can reproduce it.

6. The reproduction, for the purpose of research or private study or with a view to the publication, of an unpublished literary, dramatic, musical works kept in a library,

museum or other institution to which publichas access.31

Provided that where the identity of the author of any such work or in the case of thework of joint authorship of any of the authors is known to the library, museum or

other institution, as the case may be, the provisions of this clause shall apply only if

such reproduction is made at a time more than 60 years from the date of the death of

the author, or in the case of the work of joint authorship, from the death of the author

whose identity is known from the death of such authors who died last.32

7. The reproduction or publication of33-a. Any matter which has been published in the official gazette except an act of

the legislature;

29 Section 52(1)(h) of the Act30

Section 52(1)(m) of the Act31 Section 52(1)(p) of the Act32

Id.33 Section 52(1) (q) of the Act


12/20

12

b. Any act of a legislature subject to the condition that such Act is reproduced orpublished together with any commentary thereon or any other original matter.

c. the report of any committee, commission, council, board or other like bodyappointed by the Government if such report has been laid on the Table of the

Legislature, unless the reproduction or publication of such report is prohibited

by the Government;

d. any judgement or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority, unlessthe reproduction or publication of such judgment or order is prohibited by the

court, the tribunal or other judicial authority, as the case may be;

PERMITED PUBLICATIONS

The following publications are not an infringement under the copyright Act:

1. The publication in a collection, mainly composed of non-copyright matter, bona fideintended for the use of educational institutions, and so described in the title and in any

advertisement issued by or on behalf of the publisher, of short passages from

published literary or dramatic works, not themselves published for the use of

educational institutions, in which copyright subsists.

Provided that not more than two such passages from works by the same author are

published by the same publisher during any period of five years. [section 52(1)(g)]

Explanation.- In the case of a work of joint authorship, references in this clause to

passages from works shall include references to passages from works by any one or

more of the authors of those passages or by any one or more of those authors in

collaboration with any other person.

The Act does not define the term educational institution. Further what is a short

passage is also not defined. Therefore, it is a question of fact, degree and impression

in which the surrounding circumstances are to be taken. The exception is only

provided for literary and dramatic works34

.

2. The publication in a newspaper, magazine or other periodical of a report of a lecturedelivered in public is not an infringement of copyright. [section 52(1)(n)]

34Supra note 3.


13/20

13

Delivery in relation to lecture includes delivery by means by any mechanical

instrument or by broadcast. Only a report of a lecture can be made public, under this

provision and not otherwise and not the entire lecture.

3. The production or publication of a translation in any Indian language of an Act of aLegislature and of any rules or orders made thereunder-

i. if no translation of such Act or rules or orders in that language has previouslybeen produced or published by the Government; or

ii. where a translation of such Act or rules or orders in that language has beenproduced or published by the Government, if the translation is not available

for sale to the public:

Provided that such translation contains a statement at a prominent place to the effect

that the translation has not been authorised or accepted as authentic by the

Government; [section 52(1)(r)]

4. the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of a workof architecture or the display of a work of architecture; [section 52(1)(s)]

5. the making or publishing of a painting, drawing, engraving or photograph of asculpture, or other artistic work failing under sub-clause (iii) of clause (c) of section 2,

if such work is permanently situate in a public place or any premises to which the

public has access, [section 52(1)(t)]

PERMITED PERFORMANCE & RECITATION

1. The performance, in the course of the activities of an educational institution, of aliterary, dramatic or musical work by the staff and students of the institution, or of a

cinematograph film or a sound recordings if the audience is limited to such staff and

students, the parents and guardians of the students and persons directly connected

with the activities of the institution or the communication to such an audience of a

cinematograph film or sound recording. [section 52(1)(i)]

The exception is wider in scope as the parents and guardians of the students also

constitute part of the audience, so allowed.

2. The performance of a literary, dramatic or musical work or the communication to thepublic of such work or of a sound recording in the course of any bona fide religious

ceremony or an official ceremony held by the Central Government or the State

Government or any local authority.


14/20

14

Explanation:- For the purpose of this clause, religious ceremony including a marriage

procession and other social festivities associated with a marriage. [section 52(1)(za)]

Religious ceremonies are said to include marriage ceremonies and other social

festivals. In Super Cassette Indistries v. Nirulas Corner House (P) Ltd.35, the Delhi

High Court stated that, section 52(1)(za) is an exception to section 51. Such an

exception involving the communication of a work to the public or of a sound

recording, in the course of any bona fide religious ceremony is not a public

performance.

EXCEPTIONS IN RESPECT OF SOUND RECORDINGS & CINEMATOGRAPHIC

FILMS

1. The causing of a recording to be heard in public by utilising it,- i. in an enclosed room or hall meant for the common use of residents in any

residential premises (not being a hotel or similar commercial establishment) as

part of the amenities provided exclusively or mainly for residents therein; or

ii. as part of the activities of a club or similar organisation which is notestablished or conducted for profit;

iii. as part of the activities of a club, society or other organisation which is notestablished or conducted for profit; [section 52(1)(k)]

Illustration: A sound recording is played in a common room of a university hostel. It

is no infringement. But a sound recording played without authorisation from the

producer in the lobby of a hotel, is an infringement.

Section 52(1)(k) is an exception to Section 51. In the section 52(1)(k)(i), the use of

words as part of amenities provided is not clear. The major issue of contradiction is

between section 52(1)(k)(i) and (ii), as non-profit purpose of the

institution/club/organisation is included in the clause (ii), whereas it is not clear in (i),

that whether the residential viewers are supposed to pay anything in monetary terms

for hearing the sound recordings. The only precondition involved here is,

communication to the public. The exceptional use of terms, hotel or similar

35 (2008) PTC 237 Del, at 245


15/20

15

commercial establishment clearly establishes the legislative intention of excluding

these premises from the purview of permitted acts.

As far as the terms hotel or similar commercial establishment is to be interpreted

restrictively. As held in Hubbard v. Vosper36, the House of Lords observed that, the

proportions or quantum of usage is to be seen, before deciding the copyright

infringement action. Therefore, for instance, the placing of a television or a radio set37

in an aircraft or a Tea Stall on roadside or a ship deckor any such place is not an

infringement of any copyright of the sound recording. But if it is a tea stall, located

within the hotel premises or such likely commercial establishment, then it is a

violation of copyright of the owner of sound recording.

2. the inclusion in a cinematograph film of-i. any artistic work permanently situate in a public place or any premises to

which the public has access; or

ii. any other artistic work, if such inclusion is only by way of background or isotherwise incidental to the principal matters represented in the film

Illustration: A draws and carves out a statue in a garden. While shooting for a

cinema, a producer uses a scene, where the cine hero and heroine run around the

statue in a romantic manner. The producer of the film has not infringed any copyright.

3. in relation to a literary, dramatic or musical work recorded or reproduced in anycinematograph film the exhibition of such film after the expiration of the term ofcopyright therein

Provided that the provisions of sub-clause (ii) of clause (a), sub-clause (a) of clause

(b) and clauses (d), (f), (g), (m) and (p) shall not apply as respects any act unless that

act is accompanied by an acknowledgment-

i. identifying the work by its title or other description; andii. unless the work is anonymous or the author of the work has previously agreed

or required that no acknowledgement of his name should be made, also

identifying the author. [section 52(1)(y)]

4. the making of sound recordings in respect of any literary, dramatic or musical work,if:

36(1972) 1 All ER 1072

37 Whereby communication to the public is obvious.


16/20

16

i. sound recordings of that work have been made by or with the licence orconsent of the owner of the right in the work;

ii. the person making the sound recordings has given a notice of his intention tomake the sound recordings, has provided copies of all covers or labels with

which the sound recordings are to be sold, and has paid in the prescribed

manner to the owner of rights in the work royalities in respect of all such

sound recordings to be made by him, at the rate fixed by the Copyright Board

in this behalf:

Provided that-

i. no alterations shall be made which have not been made previously by or withthe consent of the owner of rights, or which are not reasonably necessary for

the adaptation of the work for the purpose of making the sound recordings;

ii. the sound recordings shall not be issued in any form of packaging or with anylabel which is likely to mislead or confuse the public as to their identity;

iii. no such sound recording shall be made until the expiration of two calendaryears after the end of the year in which the first sound recording of the work

was made; and

iv. the person making such sound recordings shall allow the owner of rights or hisduly authorise agent or representative to inspect all records and books of

account relating to such sound recording:

Provided further that if on a complaint brought before the Copyright Board to the

effect that the owner of rights has not been paid in full for any sound recordings

purporting to be made in pursuance of this clause, the Copyright Board is,prima

facie, satisfied that the complaint is genuine, it may pass an order ex parte directing

the person making the sound recording to cease from making further copies and, after

holding such inquiry as it considers necessary, make such further order as it may

deem fit, including an order for payment of royalty. [section 52(1)(j)]

Version recording means, sound recording made of an already published song by

using another voices and with different musicians and arrangers. Version recording is

neither a copy nor reproduction of the original recording. In Gramophone Company of


17/20

17

India Ltd v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd38, the Delhi High Court held that, records

made by the defendants were only a version recording by using another voice or

voices and with different musicians and arrangers, which clearly falls within the scope

of Section 52(1)(j). Therefore, consent was not required, in cases of version recording,

in case the intention of the defendant is not making copies of the already published

recording, but to make another sound recording by employing an entirely different set

of musicians and singers. The only thing that the defendant uses in cases of version

recording is the lyrics of the already published sound recordings. Therefore, section

52(1)(j)(ii) was an exception to the general provisions of the Act39

.

EXCEPTIONSFOR LIBRARY USE

The making of not more than three copies of a book (including a pamphlet, sheet of music,

map, chart or plan) by or under the direction of a person in charge of a public library for the

use of such library if such book is not available in India. [section 52(1)(o)]

Illustration: The librarian buys a very costly book from an Indian shop. The shop has a

number of copies of the book but the librarian chooses to make three Photostat copies of the

book for the library. The librarian has infringed the copyright of the author of the book as the

book is available in the bookshop.

PERMITED USE OF ARTISTIC WORK

The use by the author of an artistic work, where the author of such work is not the owner of

the copyright therein, of any mould, cast, sketch, plan, model or study made by him for the

purpose of the work,

Provided that he does not thereby repeat or imitate the main design of the work. [Section

52(1)(v)]

RECONSTRUCTION OF A WORK OF ARCHITECTURE

38(1995) PTR 64; where the defendant company launched a version of recording of the songs ofHindi Film

Hum apke hai kaun. The plaintiff raised the contention that, the defendant by creating the version recording

infringed the copyright of musical work in the film.39 Gramophone Co. of India Ltd v. Mars recording Pvt Ltd., (2000) PTC 117


18/20


19/20

19

4. The making of copies or adaptation of the computer programme from a personallylegally obtained copy for non-commercial personal use. [section 52(1)(ad)]

Illustration: P buys a CD having application software. P makes copies of this CD and

gives it as a gift to his friends. P has infringed the copyright of application software as his

action though no-commercial is not for personal use. If P makes a backup copy for his

personal library, no infringement takes place.

PERMITED BROADCASTING

The making of an ephemeral recording, by a broadcasting organisation using its own facilities

for its own broadcast by a broadcasting organisation of a work which it has the right to

broadcast; and the retention of such recording for archival purposes on the ground of its

exceptional documentary character. [Section 52(1)(z)]

In Video Master v. Nishi Productions42, the Bombay High Court rejected the argument of the

plaintiff that the preparation of the Betachem cassettes by the defendants for the purpose of

satellite broadcasting, infringed his copyright.

42 (23) IPLR388 (1998)


20/20

20

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

1. V K Ahuja, Intellectual Property Rights in India (I)251 (Lexis Nexis, 2009)2. S.M. Stewart, International Copyright and Neighbouring Rights 122 (Butterworths,

London, 2nd

Edn., 1989)

3. Kevin Garnett, QC; Gillian Davies et. al. (eds.) , Copinger & Skone James onCopyright 773 (Sweet and Maxwell, 15th Ed. 2009)

4. Dr. Alka chawla, Copyright and Related Rights: National and InternationalPerspectives 138 (Macmillan, New Delhi 2005)

CASES

1. Rosemant Enterprises Incorp. v. Randon House Incorp., 1966 IInd CirF366;2. Times Incorporation v. Bernard Gees Association, 1968 F 293 Supp 1303. Deller v. Samuel Goldwyn, Inc., 104 F.2d 661 (2nd Cir. 1939)4. Civic Chandran v Amini Amma 1996 Patent and Trademark Reporter 1425. Hubbard v Vosper(1972) 2 QB 84 (CA)6. Sony Corporation v Universal City Studios, Inc 464 US 417 (1984)7. Gramophone Co. of India Ltd v. Mars recording Pvt Ltd., (2000) PTC 1178. Video Master v. Nishi Productions (23) IPLR388 (1998)9. Gramophone Company ofIndia Ltd v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd (1995) PTR 6410. Super Cassette Indistries v. Nirulas Corner House (P) Ltd(2008) PTC 237 Del, at

245

11.Eastern Book Co. v. Navin J. Desai 2001 (21) PTC 57 (Del)12.Syndicate of Press, University of Cambridge v. Kasturi Lal & Sons (2006) 32 PTC

487 (Del.)

13.Blackwood and Sons Ltd. v. AN Parasuraman AIR 1959 Mad 41014.Williams & Wilkins Co v United State 487 F.2d 1345(1973)15.Ashdown v. Telegraph Group Ltd(2001) 4 All ER 66616.De Garis v. Neville Jeffress Pidler Pvt. Ltd(1990) 18 IPR 29117.Beloff v. Pressdram Ltd(1973) 1 All ER 24118.Donaldson v. Beckett4 Burr 2408

Assignment, Paper-i, Copyright

Documents

Transcript of Assignment, Paper-i, Copyright