Discuss the following:(a) Mode of licence in copyright(b) Compulsory licence for benefit of disabled persons
Question 7 – Detailed Analysis
Discuss the following:
(a) Mode of licence in copyright
(b) Compulsory licence for benefit of disabled persons
(a) Mode of Licence in Copyright – Detailed Analysis
1. Meaning of Licence in Copyright
A copyright licence is permission granted by the copyright owner to another person to use the work in a specified manner.
Without this licence, any use of the work amounts to infringement under the Copyright Act, 1957.
A licence does not transfer ownership (unlike assignment).
It only gives limited rights for specific purposes, time, and conditions.
2. Types / Modes of Licence under Copyright Act
(i) Voluntary Licence (Section 30)
- Granted voluntarily by the copyright owner.
- Must be in writing and signed by the owner or his duly authorized agent.
- Can be exclusive or non-exclusive.
- Owner decides the terms, fees, duration.
Example:
Author allowing a publisher to publish his book for 5 years.
(ii) Exclusive Licence
- Licensee gets exclusive rights to use the work.
- Even the owner cannot use the work during the licence period unless permitted.
- Must be expressly written.
(iii) Non-exclusive Licence
- Owner can give the same rights to multiple people.
- Most common in digital platforms (e.g., music streaming).
(iv) Statutory Licence (Sections 31C & 31D)
These licences are created by law and do not require owner’s consent.
Section 31C – Statutory licence for cover versions
- For sound recordings.
- Allows creation of “version recordings” with mandatory royalty payment.
Section 31D – Statutory licence for broadcasting
- Radio/TV broadcasters can broadcast songs without permission.
- They must pay royalty at rates fixed by Copyright Board.
(v) Compulsory Licence (Sections 31, 31A, 31B)
Court/Authority grants licence even without owner’s consent when:
- owner refuses to republish,
- owner is untraceable,
- work is unavailable at reasonable price,
- work is required for disabled persons (Section 31B).
This ensures public interest is not harmed.
3. Purpose of Licence
- Encourages dissemination of knowledge.
- Balances rights of creators and users.
- Prevents monopoly over creative works.
- Facilitates education, research, public access.
Case Law
Indian Performing Rights Society v. Eastern India Motion Pictures (1977)
The Supreme Court held that copyrights can be licensed in parts and different rights (reproduction, performance, recording) can be separately licensed.
(b) Compulsory Licence for Benefit of Disabled Persons – Detailed Analysis
1. Objective
To ensure that persons with disabilities have equal access to copyrighted works for:
- education,
- research,
- reading,
- communication.
It promotes accessibility and inclusion.
2. Statutory Basis – Section 31B (Copyright Act, 1957)
Section 31B allows the Copyright Board (now IPAB) to grant compulsory licence when:
- The copyright owner refuses permission for adaptation for disabled persons.
- The work is essential for disabled persons’ education or access.
- The applicant (institution/NGO/individual) has the ability and intention to produce accessible formats.
3. Who Can Apply?
- Non-profit organizations
- Educational institutions
- Registered institutions supporting disabled persons
- Individuals working for disability welfare
4. What Formats Can Be Created?
Any accessible format such as:
- Braille
- Large print
- Audio books
- Digital accessible formats (DAISY, EPUB3 accessibility)
- Sign-language adapted versions
5. Conditions for Grant of Compulsory Licence
The authority checks:
- Public interest involved
- Licence is only for non-profit purposes
- Adequate royalty payment to copyright owner (if applicable)
- Proper record-keeping of distribution
- No commercial exploitation
6. Purpose and Importance
- Protects Rights of Persons with Disabilities under Article 21.
- Supports UNCRPD obligations (India is a signatory).
- Ensures inclusive education under Section 16 of RPWD Act, 2016.
7. Case Law (Relevant Context)
DU Photocopy Case (The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford v. Rameshwari Photocopy Services, 2016)
Although not directly about disability, the Delhi High Court stressed public interest and access to knowledge, which is the same principle behind Section 31B.
Conclusion – Combined Summary
- Copyright licences allow others to use copyrighted works legally.
- Different modes include voluntary, exclusive, non-exclusive, statutory, and compulsory licences.
- Compulsory licence for disabled persons (Section 31B) is a special public-interest mechanism ensuring accessibility.
- This provision balances the rights of creators with social welfare and constitutional mandates.
Below are relevant case laws for both parts of Question 7—
(1) Mode of Licence in Copyright
(2) Compulsory Licence for Disabled Persons
Written in LLB-exam style, easy language, and with proper explanations.
✅ A. Case Laws Related to “Mode of Licence in Copyright”
1. Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. (IPRS) v. Eastern India Motion Pictures Association (1977) – Supreme Court
Principle:
The Supreme Court held that copyright consists of a bundle of rights, and each right can be separately assigned or licensed.
Relevance:
This case shows that licences can be:
- partial,
- limited to specific rights such as performance or reproduction,
- given without transferring ownership.
Thus, the decision clarifies the legal concept of exclusive and non-exclusive licences.
2. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. (2011)
(Delhi High Court)
Principle:
The Court held that statutory licences under Section 31D must balance:
- broadcasters’ right to access works
- with the copyright owner’s right to receive fair compensation.
Relevance:
This case explains the working of statutory licences, especially for broadcasting (radio/TV).
3. Tips Industries Ltd. v. Wynk Music Ltd. (2019)
(Bombay High Court)
Principle:
The court held that digital streaming platforms cannot use songs without licence from copyright owners.
Relevance:
Highlights the need for:
- voluntary licences
- exclusive and non-exclusive licences
- licensing for digital platforms.
Shows how licensing applies in the modern digital environment.
4. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries (2008)
(Supreme Court)
Principle:
The dispute involved refusal of licence for broadcasting sound recordings.
The Supreme Court clarified:
- Criteria for granting compulsory licences
- Importance of public interest
- Reasonable terms for users.
Relevance:
Important case explaining compulsory licences, especially when owners refuse access to works.
5. Video Master v. Nishi Productions (1998)
(Bombay High Court)
Principle:
Held that even when a film is assigned to a producer, underlying works (music, lyrics) still require separate licences unless rights are explicitly transferred.
Relevance:
Shows that licences must be express and in writing and reinforces Section 30 requirements.
✅ B. Case Laws Related to “Compulsory Licence for Disabled Persons (Section 31B)”
Note: Section 31B was introduced by the 2012 Amendment, so there are few direct cases. But related judgments support the constitutional and public-interest principles behind compulsory licences.
1. DU Photocopy Case (The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford v. Rameshwari Photocopy Services, 2016)
(Delhi High Court)
Principle:
The Court held:
- educational use
- and access to knowledge
are important public-interest considerations.
Copyright should not restrict access to essential materials.
Relevance:
Although not specific to disability, this case supports Section 31B’s purpose—
ensuring access for disadvantaged groups, including disabled persons.
2. Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. v. Super Cassettes Industries (2008)
(Supreme Court)
Principle:
The Supreme Court recognised that compulsory licences serve public welfare.
Public interest must prevail over unreasonable refusal by copyright owners.
Relevance:
Supports the idea that Section 31B allows compulsory licences for disabled persons for public benefit.
3. International Case – Marrakesh Treaty (2013) Influence
(India is a signatory; not a case but a legal authority)
Principle:
The treaty promotes accessible formats for visually impaired persons.
India amended Section 31B inspired by this treaty.
Relevance:
Provides international legal justification for compulsory licences for disabled persons.
4. K. Vathsan v. Union of India (Madras High Court, 2015)
Principle:
Court observed that the State must provide all facilities for ensuring equal access to education for disabled persons.
Relevance:
Although about disability law, it supports the spirit of Section 31B —
right to accessible material is part of Article 21 and Article 14.
Comments
Post a Comment