---

Indian Copyright Law – Analysis with Case Laws

---

(a) The Copyright Act, 1957 with its Amendments

• Main law in India governing copyright.
• Protects literary, artistic, dramatic, musical works, cinematograph films, sound recordings.
• The Act has been amended in 1983, 1984, 1992, 1994, 1999, 2012.

👉 2012 Amendment is most important:

1. Moral rights strengthened – authors have right to be credited.
2. Protection for digital works & internet use.
3. Royalty rights – composers, lyricists get share even if they transfer copyright.
4. Copyright societies regulated.

📌 Case Law:
EBC v. D.B. Modak (2008, SC) – Courts held that originality means “skill and judgment,” not just “sweat of the brow.” Judgments are public documents, but headnotes and formatting by publishers are copyrightable.

---

(b) Copyright Office and Copyright Board

• Copyright Office: Maintains records, registration, licensing. Headed by the Registrar of Copyrights.
• Copyright Board (now Appellate Board): Quasi-judicial body to settle disputes like licensing, royalties, ownership disputes.

📌 Case Law:
Gramophone Co. of India v. Birendra Bahadur Pandey (1984, SC) – Customs authorities stopped pirated cassettes at the border. Court held that copyright enforcement is important to protect the economy and creators.

---

(c) Copyright Works

Works that get copyright protection:

1. Literary works → books, poems, software.
2. Dramatic works → scripts, plays.
3. Musical works → melody, lyrics.
4. Artistic works → paintings, photographs, sculptures.
5. Cinematograph films → movies.
6. Sound recordings → songs, albums.

📌 Case Law:
University of London Press v. University Tutorial Press (1916, UK) – Exam papers were held copyrightable. Even simple works qualify if they involve skill and effort.

---

(d) Ownership, Assignment and Licensing

• Ownership: Generally, the author/creator is the first owner.
  • Exception → If created during employment, then employer is the first owner.
• Assignment: Transfer of rights (like sale). Must be in writing and signed.
• Licensing: Author allows someone else to use the work under conditions (time, area, purpose).

📌 Case Law:
Indian Performing Rights Society v. Eastern India Motion Pictures (1977, SC) – Producers of films became owners of songs used in films, not music composers. (But 2012 amendment changed this – now composers/lyricists retain rights to royalty.)

---

(e) Term of Copyright and Registration

• Literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works: Lifetime of author + 60 years.
• Films & sound recordings: 60 years from publication.
• Registration: Not compulsory, but helpful in proving ownership.

📌 Case Law:
Pine Labs v. Gemalto (Delhi HC, 2019) – Computer software copyright dispute. Court held copyright exists even without registration; registration is only evidence, not a requirement.

---

(f) Neighbouring Rights

These are rights given to people who are not the main authors, but help in communicating the work.

• Performers’ rights: Singers, actors, dancers. (Performance rights last 50 years).
• Broadcast reproduction rights: TV, radio broadcasters.
• Moral rights of performers: Right to be identified and not have performance distorted.

📌 Case Law:
Super Cassette Industries v. Bathla Cassette Industries (1994, Delhi HC) – Held that unauthorized reproduction of sound recordings violates neighbouring rights.

---

Conclusion (for exam writing)

• Copyright Act, 1957 is the backbone of Indian copyright law, amended several times to address digital piracy and royalties.
• The Copyright Office manages registration; the Board/Tribunal settles disputes.
• Protection extends to literary, artistic, dramatic, musical works, films and sound recordings.
• Ownership, assignment, licensing ensure creators get credit and control.
• Term of protection is lifetime of author + 60 years.
• Neighbouring rights protect performers and broadcasters.

Key Cases to Remember:

1. EBC v. Modak – originality test in India.
2. Gramophone Co. v. Birendra Bahadur – anti-piracy enforcement.
3. University of London Press – skill makes a work copyrightable.
4. IPRS v. Eastern India Motion Pictures – film producers’ ownership (changed by 2012 amendment).
5. Pine Labs v. Gemalto – registration not compulsory.

---

Got it 👍 You’re asking me to rewrite the Indian Copyright Law analysis but this time with sections of the Copyright Act, 1957 mentioned clearly. I’ll also keep case laws + easy exam-style explanation.

---

Indian Copyright Law (with Sections + Case Laws)

---

(a) The Copyright Act, 1957 with its AmendmentsMain law in India governing copyright.

Section 13 → Works in which copyright subsists (literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works, cinematograph films, sound recordings).

Section 14 → Meaning of copyright = exclusive rights of owner (reproduction, distribution, performance, adaptation, translation).

2012 Amendment Authors of songs (lyricists, composers) get royalty rights even if they assign copyright.

Protection extended to digital and internet-based works.

Stronger protection of moral rights (Section 57).

📌 Case Law: Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak (2008, SC) – Judgments are public property, but editorial additions (headnotes, formatting) are copyrightable.

(b) Copyright Office and Copyright Board

Section 9 → Establishment of Copyright Office (headed by Registrar).

Section 11 → Copyright Board (now merged into IPAB – Intellectual Property Appellate Board).

Role → Settlement of disputes like ownership, licensing, royalty, and compulsory licences.

📌 Case Law: Gramophone Co. of India v. Birendra Bahadur Pandey (1984, SC) – Court stressed the need to prevent piracy and protect copyright works, showing the importance of enforcement through authorities.

(c) Copyright Works

Section 13 → Copyright subsists in:

1. Literary works (includes software).

2. Dramatic works.

3. Musical works.

4. Artistic works.

5. Cinematograph films.

6. Sound recordings.

📌 Case Law: University of London Press v. University Tutorial Press (1916) – Exam papers are copyrightable because they involve skill and judgment.

(d) Ownership, Assignment and Licensing

Section 17 → First owner is the author (exception: works made under employment – employer is owner).

Section 18 → Assignment of copyright must be in writing and signed by owner.

Section 30 → Licensing – copyright owner can grant licence to others under conditions.

📌 Case Law: Indian Performing Rights Society v. Eastern India Motion Pictures (1977, SC) – Producers became first owners of songs in films (but after 2012 amendment, composers/lyricists also retain royalty rights).

---

(e) Term of Copyright and Registration

Section 22 → Literary, dramatic, musical, artistic works → lifetime of author + 60 years.

Section 23 → Anonymous and pseudonymous works → 60 years from publication.

Section 26 → Cinematograph films → 60 years from publication.

Section 27 → Sound recordings → 60 years from publication.

Section 45 → Registration of copyright (optional, not compulsory, but useful as evidence).

📌 Case Law: Pine Labs v. Gemalto (Delhi HC, 2019) – Copyright exists even without registration; registration is only prima facie evidence of ownership.

(f) Neighbouring Rights

Section 37 → Performers’ rights (actors, singers, dancers).

Section 38 & 38A → Performer has right to be credited and to restrain distortion of performance.

Section 39 → Broadcasting reproduction rights (TV, radio broadcasters get exclusive rights).

Duration → 50 years from performance/broadcast.

📌 Case Law: Super Cassette Industries v. Bathla Cassette Industries (1994, Delhi HC) – Unauthorized duplication of sound recordings infringes performers’ and producers’ rights.

---

Conclusion (for Exam Writing)

Sections 13–14 define scope of copyright.

Sections 9–11 establish the Office/Board for administration.

Sections 17–18 & 30 regulate ownership, assignment, and licensing.

Sections 22–27 & 45 explain duration and registration.

Sections 37–39 give neighbouring rights to performers and broadcasters.

---

Important Case Laws on Indian Copyright Law (Detailed)

---

1. Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak (2008, Supreme Court of India)

• Relevant Sections: Sec. 13 (works in which copyright subsists), Sec. 14 (meaning of copyright).
• Facts: Eastern Book Company (EBC) published Supreme Court judgments with headnotes, formatting, and paragraph numbering. D.B. Modak copied the judgments with the same editorial features.
• Issue: Are judgments copyrightable? If not, can the added editorial work be protected?
• Judgment:
  • Supreme Court held that judgments themselves are public documents → no copyright.
  • But, editorial work like headnotes, footnotes, paragraphing, formatting involve skill and judgment → hence copyrightable.
• Principle: Originality means more than “sweat of the brow”; it requires minimum creativity (the “modicum of creativity” test).

---

2. University of London Press v. University Tutorial Press (1916, UK)

• Relevant Section (Indian Act): Sec. 13 (literary works).
• Facts: University examiners prepared question papers. The defendant copied them and published them in a guidebook.
• Issue: Can examination question papers be considered “literary works”?
• Judgment: Court held that even though question papers are not creative literature, they involve skill, judgment, and effort of the examiner, hence they are literary works.
• Principle: Copyright does not require imagination, only that the work originates from the author and involves intellectual effort.

---

3. R.G. Anand v. Deluxe Films (1978, Supreme Court of India)

• Relevant Section: Sec. 14 (meaning of copyright, protection of expression not idea).
• Facts: R.G. Anand wrote a play “Hum Hindustani”. Deluxe Films later made a film “New Delhi”. Anand alleged that the film copied his play.
• Issue: Does similarity of theme/idea amount to copyright infringement?
• Judgment: Court held → No infringement. Only the idea was similar, but the expression was different.
• Principle: Copyright protects expression of an idea, not the idea itself. If two works have the same theme but are expressed differently, it is not infringement.

---

4. Indian Performing Rights Society (IPRS) v. Eastern India Motion Pictures (1977, SC)

• Relevant Sections: Sec. 17 (first ownership), Sec. 18 (assignment).
• Facts: Dispute between music composers/lyricists and film producers. IPRS argued that authors of songs should retain rights, even if songs are used in films. Producers argued they are owners.
• Judgment: Supreme Court held → Film producers are the first owners of songs in films, because composers/lyricists created works under contract.
• Principle: In employment/contractual works, employer or producer becomes the first owner.
• Note: After 2012 Amendment (Sec. 18) → composers/lyricists retain right to royalty even if they assign copyright to producers.

---

5. Gramophone Company of India Ltd. v. Birendra Bahadur Pandey (1984, SC)

• Relevant Section: Sec. 51 (infringement of copyright).
• Facts: Gramophone Co. imported cassettes legally manufactured in Nepal. Customs stopped them, saying it violated Indian copyright.
• Issue: Can import of goods legally made abroad amount to copyright infringement in India?
• Judgment: Supreme Court held → Yes, importation without owner’s permission amounts to infringement.
• Principle: Copyright has territorial application. Even if goods are legally made abroad, importing them without authorization violates Indian copyright.

---

6. Gramophone Co. of India Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries (1996, Delhi HC)

• Relevant Section: Sec. 37–39 (neighbouring rights).
• Facts: Super Cassette duplicated music cassettes without authorization from Gramophone Company.
• Judgment: Court held unauthorized duplication amounts to copyright infringement.
• Principle: Sound recordings and performers’ rights are protected, and piracy is punishable.

---

7. Pine Labs Pvt. Ltd. v. Gemalto Terminals India (Delhi HC, 2019)

• Relevant Section: Sec. 45 (registration of copyright).
• Facts: Pine Labs alleged that Gemalto copied its computer software. The defendant argued that the software was not registered.
• Issue: Is registration compulsory for copyright?
• Judgment: Court held → Registration is not mandatory. Copyright exists from the moment the work is created. Registration is only evidence of ownership.
• Principle: Copyright subsists automatically; registration is optional.

---

 (for Quick Exam Revision)

Case	Section	Principle
EBC v. D.B. Modak (2008)	Sec. 13, 14	Originality = skill + judgment (editorial notes protected).
University of London Press (1916)	Sec. 13	Question papers = literary work (skill involved).
R.G. Anand v. Deluxe Films (1978)	Sec. 14	Ideas not protected, only expression is.
IPRS v. Eastern India Motion Pictures (1977)	Sec. 17, 18	Producer = first owner (changed by 2012 amendment).
Gramophone Co. v. Birendra Bahadur (1984)	Sec. 51	Importation without consent = infringement.
Gramophone Co. v. Super Cassette (1996)	Sec. 37–39	Neighbouring rights protected, piracy punished.
Pine Labs v. Gemalto (2019)	Sec. 45	Registration not mandatory for copyright.

---