FAIR USE (FAIR DEALING) — DETAILED ANALYSIS

---

I. FAIR USE (FAIR DEALING) — DETAILED ANALYSIS

(Section 52 of the Copyright Act)

Fair use means certain uses of copyrighted work are allowed without permission, as long as they are for legitimate purposes and do not harm the copyright owner.

It acts as a defence against copyright infringement.

---

A. Situations Considered Fair Use (Section 52)

1. Private or Personal Use

Using a work for private study, homework, research, or personal reading is allowed.

Example: Photocopying a few pages for exam study.

---

2. Criticism or Review

You can use parts of the work for writing a review, analysis, or commentary.

Example: Quoting lines from a novel while writing a book review.

---

3. Reporting Current Events

Media can use parts of copyrighted works while reporting news.

Example: Showing a few seconds of a speech in news coverage.

---

4. Educational Use

Teachers, students, schools, and universities can use copyrighted content for classroom teaching.

Example: Showing videos or printing chapters for teaching purposes.

---

5. Judicial Use

Courts, lawyers, and government bodies can use copyrighted work for legal proceedings.

---

6. Temporary Storage and Digital Use

Temporary digital copies made by computers/internet for technical purposes are allowed.

---

Important Case Law on Fair Use

1. The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford v. Rameshwari Photocopy Service (Delhi HC, 2016)

Facts: A photocopy shop inside Delhi University made course packs by photocopying extracts from multiple books.
Held: This was fair dealing for educational purposes under Section 52(1)(i).
Significance: The court protected educational rights of students.

---

2. Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma (Kerala HC, 1996)

Held:
If a work is used to create criticism or parody without replacing the original market, it is fair use.

---

II. INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT — DETAILED ANALYSIS

(Section 51)

You infringe copyright when you use, copy, sell, distribute, upload, publish, perform, broadcast, or translate a copyrighted work without permission from the rights holder.

---

A. When is Copyright Infringed? (Section 51)

1. Unauthorized Use

If someone does anything that only the copyright owner has the right to do
(Example: copying, selling, uploading).

---

2. Allowing Place for Infringement

If someone knowingly allows their premises to be used for unauthorized performance.

Example: A café playing pirated songs.

---

3. Selling or Distributing Pirate Copies

Buying, selling, importing, or storing pirated copies.

---

4. Circumvention of Digital Rights (DRM)

Breaking digital locks or removing copyright messages.

---

B. Examples of Infringement

• Uploading movies or songs on YouTube without permission
• Screening movies publicly without license
• Creating remixes without permission
• Copying content from books or websites and publishing as your own
• Using another person’s software without license

---

Important Case Law on Infringement

1. Gramophone Company of India v. Super Cassettes (Delhi HC, 2010)

Held that using even a part of a sound recording without permission is infringement.

---

2. Indian Performing Rights Society (IPRS) v. Aditya Pandey (2011)

Held that playing songs at events without a license from IPRS amounts to infringement.

---

3. Taj Television v. Rajan Mandal (Delhi HC, 2003)

Unauthorized cable retransmission of live cricket matches = infringement of broadcast rights.

---

III. REMEDIES FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT — DETAILED ANALYSIS (Civil + Criminal)

Remedies are given under the Copyright Act, 1957 and Civil Procedure Code.

There are three types of remedies:

---

A. Civil Remedies (Section 55)

1. Injunction (Stop Order)

Court can order the infringer to immediately stop the unauthorized activity.

Example: Stop selling pirated books.

---

2. Damages (Monetary Compensation)

Court orders the infringer to pay money to the copyright owner for loss.

Types:

• Compensatory damages
• Punitive damages (to punish the infringer)
• Account of profits (give profits earned illegally)

---

3. Delivery Up and Destruction

Court may order seizure, removal, and destruction of all pirated copies.

---

4. Anton Piller Order

Court orders a surprise inspection/search to prevent destruction of evidence.

---

5. Mareva Injunction

Freezing of assets to prevent the infringer from hiding profits.

---

Important Case Law – Civil Remedies

Microsoft Corporation v. Yogesh Popat (Delhi HC, 2005)

The court granted punitive damages against a computer shop selling pirated software.

---

B. Criminal Remedies (Sections 63–70)

1. Imprisonment

Minimum 6 months – extendable to 3 years.

2. Fine

Minimum fine of ₹50,000 – extendable to ₹2 lakh.

3. Seizure of Infringing Copies

Police may confiscate all pirated material.

4. Repeat Offenders

Enhanced imprisonment and fine.

---

Important Case Law – Criminal Remedies

State v. Appa Rao (AP High Court, 1961)

Held that knowingly selling pirated books amounts to criminal liability.

---

C. Administrative Remedies

1. Copyright Board / Copyright Office

May order licensing, royalties, and settlement of disputes.

2. Blocking Online Content (IT Act + Copyright Act)

Platforms may be ordered to block infringing websites or videos.Below is a full, detailed, easy-language, LLB-exam–oriented case-law analysis ONLY on Fair Use, Infringement, and Remedies, exactly like you asked.

Each case is given with Facts – Issue – Judgment – Significance (perfect exam format).

---

A. IMPORTANT CASE LAWS ON FAIR USE (SECTION 52)

---

1. The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford v. Rameshwari Photocopy Service (Delhi High Court, 2016)

Facts:
Publishers sued a DU-area photocopy shop for preparing “course packs” using photocopied chapters from foreign textbooks.

Issue:
Is photocopying for educational purposes “fair use” under Section 52?

Judgment:
Yes. The court held the photocopying was fair dealing for education under Section 52(1)(i). Students cannot be burdened with high book prices.

Significance:
Very important case. It expanded educational fair use and protected poor students and universities.

---

2. Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma (Kerala HC, 1996)

Facts:
Defendant wrote a drama criticizing another drama. Some parts of the original were copied to show contrast.

Issue:
Is criticism that uses portions of the original work “fair use”?

Judgment:
Yes.
The use was transformative and for criticism, so it qualified as fair dealing.

Significance:
Introduced the idea of transformative use in Indian law (parody, criticism).

---

3. India TV v. Yashraj Films (Delhi HC, 2012)

Facts:
TV channel used parts of Bollywood songs in a documentary.

Issue:
Does using copyrighted film songs for criticism fall under fair use?

Judgment:
Court allowed limited use under criticism and review, but warned against excessive commercial exploitation.

Significance:
Clarified that purpose and amount used decide fair use.

---

B. IMPORTANT CASE LAWS ON COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT (SECTION 51)

---

4. Gramophone Company of India Ltd. v. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. (Delhi HC, 2010)

Facts:
T-Series used portions of HMV’s old sound recordings without permission.

Issue:
Does using even a “small part” of a sound recording amount to infringement?

Judgment:
Yes. Sound recording copyright belongs to the producer.
Any use without permission is infringement.

Significance:
Confirmed that sound recordings have independent copyright.

---

5. IPRS v. Aditya Pandey (Delhi HC, 2011)

Facts:
Hotels and event organizers played songs without obtaining licenses from IPRS.

Issue:
Is public performance without a license infringement?

Judgment:
Yes. Public performance requires a license from the copyright society.

Significance:
Strengthened rights of copyright societies to collect royalties.

---

6. Taj Television v. Rajan Mandal (Delhi HC, 2003)

Facts:
Cable operators retransmitted World Cup matches without authorization.

Issue:
Does unauthorized cable rebroadcast violate broadcaster’s rights?

Judgment:
Yes. It is infringement under Section 37.

Significance:
Protected broadcasters against piracy of live sports.

---

7. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. Hamar TV (Delhi HC, 2009)

Facts:
News channel aired parts of film songs without permission.

Issue:
Does showing songs in news channels amount to infringement?

Judgment:
Yes. It was not reporting news but using copyrighted content.

Significance:
Narrowed the exception of “reporting current events.”

---

8. Penguin Books Ltd. v. India Book Distributors (1998)

Facts:
A distributor imported large quantities of foreign editions without permission.

Issue:
Is unauthorized import of copyrighted books infringement?

Judgment:
Yes. Importation of infringing copies violates Section 51(b).

Significance:
Important for parallel importation issues.

---

C. IMPORTANT CASE LAWS ON REMEDIES FOR INFRINGEMENT

---

9. Microsoft Corporation v. Yogesh Popat (Delhi HC, 2005)

Facts:
A shop sold computers with pirated Microsoft software.

Issue:
What remedies should be given for software piracy?

Judgment:
Court granted:

• Injunction
• Seizure of pirated CDs
• Punitive damages of ₹5 lakhs

Significance:
Strong deterrence against software piracy.

---

10. Time Warner v. Sudarshan Video (Delhi HC, 1998)

Facts:
Defendants illegally copied and sold video cassettes of Warner’s films.

Issue:
Can the court order destruction of pirated material?

Judgment:
Yes. Court ordered:

• Destruction of all pirated copies
• Permanent injunction
• Damages

Significance:
Established the remedy of delivery up and destruction.

---

11. Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Performing Rights Society (2011)

Facts:
FM Radio refused to pay royalties to IPRS.

Issue:
Can courts direct interim royalty payments?

Judgment:
Yes. Court ordered FM stations to pay interim royalties.

Significance:
Shows economic remedies available under copyright law.

---

12. State v. Appa Rao (AP HC, 1961)

Facts:
The accused was selling pirated books.

Issue:
Does selling pirated copies lead to criminal punishment?

Judgment:
Yes. Court upheld criminal liability under Sections 63–70.

Significance:
Early case confirming criminal penalties for piracy.

---