Skip to main content

Copyright

 Copyright


Creators of literary, dramatic, musical, and aesthetic works, as well as makers of

cinematograph films and sound recordings, have a legal claim to copyright. In truth, it is a

collection of rights that includes, among other things, the rights to reproduce, communicate to

the public, alter, and translate the work.

Depending on the work, there may be minor differences in the composition of the rights.

Copyright protects and rewards innovation by ensuring some minimal safeguards for writers'

rights over their creations. Given that creativity is at the heart of progress, no civilized society

can afford to ignore the imperative of fostering it.

Creativity is critical for economic and social advancement in a community. Copyright

safeguards the work of writers, artists, designers, dramatists, musicians, architects, and

producers of sound recordings, cinematograph films, and computer software, while also

promoting a creative atmosphere that inspires them to create more and motivates others to

create. 

In January 1958, the Copyright Act of 1957 (the 'Act') came into effect. Since then, the Act

has been amended five times: in 1983, 1984, 1992, 1994, 1999, and 2012. The Copyright Act

of 1957 safeguards against the unlawful use of original literary, dramatic, musical, and

artistic works, as well as cinematograph films and sound recordings. Unlike patents,

copyright protects expressions rather than ideas. As such, ideas, procedures, methods of

operation, and mathematical concepts are not protected by copyright. 


The most significant is the Copyright (Amendment) Act of 2012

The primary reason for amending the Copyright Act, 1957 is to bring it into compliance with

two WIPO internet treaties signed in 1996, namely the WIPO Copyright Treaty ("WCT") and

the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty ("WPPT"); to protect and address the Music

and Film Industries' concerns; to address the concerns of the physically disabled and to

protect the author's interests; to make incidental changes; to eliminate operational facilities;

and to extend the term of the Copyright Act, 1957 


Copyright Office:

Section 9 of the Copyright Act requires for the establishment of an office to be called the

Copyright Office for the purpose of the Act. The Copyright Office is to be under the

immediate control of a Registrar of Copyrights to be appointed by the Central Government,

who would act under the superintendence and directions of the Central Government. The

Copyright Office is currently located at the following address: 

Boudhik Sampada Bhawan,

Plot No. 32, Sector 14, Dwarka,

New Delhi-110078


Registration Procedure: The registration procedure is as follows:

a. The application for registration must be made on Form XIV (Including Statement of

Particulars and Statement of Further Particulars) as prescribed in the first schedule to

the Rules;

b. Each work must have its own application;

c. Each application must be accompanied by the requisite fee as prescribed in the second

schedule to the Rules; and

d. The applications must be signed by the applicant. If applicable, a Power of Attorney

signed by the party and accepted by the advocate should be included.

e. The fee can be paid by Demand Draft or Indian Postal Order made payable to

"Registrar Of Copyrights Payable At New Delhi" or by E-payment.


Is it possible to register both published and unpublished works?

Copyright in works published prior to the 21st of January 1958, i.e. before the Copyright Act,

1957, may also be registered, as long as the works retain their copyright protection. Two

copies of previously published or unpublished content may be included with the application.

If the work to be registered has never been published, a copy of the manuscript must

accompany the application for affixing the Copyright Office's registration stamp. One

identical duplicate, properly stamped, will be returned, while the other will be kept

confidential and stored at the Copyright Office to the extent possible.


Additionally, the applicant may transmit excerpts from the unpublished work rather than the

complete manuscript and request that the extracts be returned once they have been stamped

with the Copyright Office's seal. When work is first registered as unpublished and thereafter

published, the applicant may, for a fee, submit a Form XV request for modifications to the

details included in the Register of Copyright. 


Why claim Copyright?

Originality is seen as "the core premise of copyright law" and "the bedrock principle of

copyright." To be considered copyrightable, a work must have been created via the author's

labor, skill, and judgment. Furthermore, such exertions on the author's part should not be

trivial, and hence should not be limited to the mechanical function of copying another's work.

Due to the quantitative nature of the degree of originality criterion, the variation must be

substantial rather than minor.


A certificate of registration of copyright and the entries made therein serve as prima facie

evidence in a court of law with reference to disputes relating to ownership of copyright.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more