📚 WHAT IS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT?

🔹 Definition:

 Copyright infringement occurs when a copyrighted work is used without the

permission of the copyright holder or without any legal justification.

🔹 Common Types of Infringement:

1. Unauthorized Actions:
o Reproduction

o Distribution

o Performance

o Display of copyrighted works

2. Unauthorized Derivative Works:

o Creating adaptations, spin-offs, or altered versions of a work without
permission
3. Other Acts of Infringement:
o Translation

o Public performance

o Adaptation

o Any use without legal permission

⚖️ELEMENTS OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

To prove infringement, four key elements must be established:

1. Ownership of Copyright
o The plaintiff must show they legally own the copyrighted work.

2. Copying of the Work

o The defendant must have copied the work without proper authorization.

3. Substantial Similarity
o The copied work must be substantially similar to the original.
 4. Infringing Act
o There must be an act of unauthorized use, such as distribution, performance,
or publication.

🧾 TYPES OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

1. Direct Infringement
 The individual directly violates copyright by unauthorized reproduction, distribution,
or performance.
2. Secondary Infringement
 Assisting others in infringement, e.g.:
o Hosting pirated content

o Encouraging or facilitating illegal use

3. Willful Infringement
 Deliberate, intentional violation for personal or financial benefit.
4. Indirect Infringement
 Using a copyrighted work in ways not allowed by the copyright holder, even without
direct copying.

📜 SECTION 51 – INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT (India)

🔹 Acts Considered Infringement:

1. Reproduction of a copyrighted work in any material form without authorization.

2. Communication of the work to the public (e.g., broadcasting or online sharing).
3. Public performance or adaptation of the work without the copyright owner's
consent.
🔹 Exception – Fair Use:

 Certain uses do not constitute infringement, such as:

o Educational purposes

o Research

o Criticism or review

o Reporting of current events

1. Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia (2013)
 Background:
Unauthorized public performance of musical works.
 Issue:
IPRS sued Sanjay Dalia for performing copyrighted music without obtaining proper
licenses.
 Outcome:
The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of IPRS, confirming that public performance
without consent constitutes copyright infringement.
 Significance:
Reinforced that consent and licensing are mandatory for public performance of
musical works under the Copyright Act.

2. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. Entertainment Network India Ltd. (2008)

 Background:
Unauthorized broadcasting of music via radio and digital platforms.
 Issue:
Super Cassettes sued for infringement due to lack of a valid license.
 Outcome:
The Bombay High Court ruled in favor of Super Cassettes, holding that
broadcasting music without a license infringes copyright.
 Significance:
o Licensing is mandatory for public and digital broadcasting.

o A compulsory license can be sought by a broadcaster, even if another license

exists.
o The Copyright Board has the authority to set terms, royalties, and
conditions case-by-case, considering previous infringements.
3. Rameshwari Photocopy Services v. Union of India (2016)
 Background:
A Delhi-based photocopy shop was accused of copyright violation by photocopying
course materials for students.
 Issue:
Whether photocopying educational material for student use falls under "fair dealing"
under Indian copyright law.
 Outcome:
The Delhi High Court allowed limited photocopying for educational use, stating
that such use serves public interest.
 Significance:
Strengthened the "fair dealing" exception (Indian equivalent of "fair use") for non-
commercial educational purposes.

4. Shree Venkateshwara Music Co. v. Government of India (2016)

 Background:
Unauthorized public use of music in malls and public transport.
 Issue:
Whether using copyrighted music in public places without licenses amounts to
infringement.
 Outcome:
The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, holding that such use requires prior
licensing.
 Significance:
Reinforced that music and sound recordings are protected under the Copyright Act,
even in public settings.

5. T-Series v. MySpace (2010)

 Background:
T-Series music was being pirated and distributed without authorization via user
uploads on MySpace.
 Issue:
Whether digital platforms are liable for user-uploaded copyrighted content.
 Outcome:
The court sided with T-Series, finding MySpace liable for digital copyright
infringement.
 Significance:
Set a legal precedent for intermediary liability, holding online platforms
accountable for monitoring and controlling piracy.

6. Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures LLP (2024)

  Background:
Involved unauthorized alteration and sharing of Arijit Singh's performances that
could impact his public image.
 Legal Basis:
Invoked Section 38-B of the Copyright Act, 1957, dealing with performers’ moral
rights.
 Outcome:
The court ruled in favor of Singh, recognizing unauthorized use of his voice, likeness,
and persona as a violation of his personality and moral rights.
 Significance:
o Strengthened moral rights and performers' control over their image.

o Emphasized personality rights and right to publicity in the Indian context.

⚖️ELEMENTS OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

1. Original Work
o The work must be the original creation of the author.

2. Actual Copying
o The defendant must have actually copied the author’s work.

3. Not All Copying Is Actionable

o Mere factual copying is not always legally actionable.

o There must be a legal basis for the claim (i.e., violation of protected
expression, not just facts or ideas).
4. Substantial Similarity
o A significant degree of similarity must exist between the original and the
allegedly infringing work.
o This similarity should go beyond superficial elements.

📌 PRIMARY INFRINGEMENT

 Definition:
Direct, actual copying and unauthorized use of copyrighted material.
 Example:
Photocopying a book and distributing it commercially.
  Partial Copying:
Even copying part of a work (e.g., a paragraph or a phrase) can amount to
infringement if:
1. Substantial Taking is proven
2. Causal Connection exists

✅ SUBSTANTIAL TAKING

 Infringement occurs if a substantial part of the work is copied without permission.

 Examples:
o Copying a catchy lyric, signature phrase, or distinctive content

o Using similar writing style, language, and errors

 Perception Test:
o The "ordinary observer test" is applied:
If a regular person perceives that one work is copied from another, it likely
constitutes infringement.
 Minor Alterations Don’t Prevent Infringement:
o Making small changes to the original work does not invalidate the copyright
claim.

🔗 CAUSAL CONNECTION

 The copyright holder must show that:

o The infringer had access to the original work

o The similarities are not coincidental

 Limitation:
o If both parties used the same external source (e.g., a public database or
research paper), no infringement can be claimed.

📄 SECONDARY INFRINGEMENT

Definition: Involves contributing to copyright infringement without directly copying the

work.
Modes of Secondary Infringement:
 1. Providing a Place
o Renting or allowing a space for copyright-infringing activities (e.g., showing
pirated movies in a hall).
2. Selling Infringing Copies
o Engaging in commercial sale of pirated materials like books, CDs, or
software.
3. Distributing Infringing Copies
o Circulating or distributing copies without authorization, even if not for
profit.
4. Importing Infringing Copies
o Bringing pirated or unauthorized versions of copyrighted material into India
for sale or distribution.

⚖️TEST FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

Courts apply a Three-Factor Test to determine if infringement has occurred:

1. Quantum of Work Copied
o How much of the original content has been copied (quality matters more than
quantity).
2. Purpose of Copying
o Why the work was copied — was it for commercial gain, education,
criticism, etc.?
3. Likelihood of Competition
o Could the copied work compete in the market with the original and affect its
value?

LEGAL REMEDIES FOR INFRINGEMENT

1. Civil Remedies
 Injunction: Stop the infringing activity.
 Damages: Monetary compensation for the copyright holder.
 Accounts of Profit: Claim profits earned by the infringer.
2. Criminal Remedies
  Punishment:
o Minimum: 6 months imprisonment

o Maximum: 6 years

 Fine:
o Minimum: ₹50,000

o Maximum: ₹2,00,000

 Repeat Offence: Leads to higher penalties and jail time.

👥 PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR INFRINGEMENT

The Copyright Act holds multiple parties liable, not just the direct copier.
👇 Includes:

 Venue Owners: If they knowingly allow pirated content to be exhibited (e.g.,

screening pirated films).
 Commercial Dealers:
o Those who sell, hire, or import pirated works.

o Includes people selling pirated CDs, films, books, or software.

⚖️Legal Actions:

 Civil Suit:
o Can be filed in a district court where the plaintiff resides or where the cause
of action occurred.
 Criminal Prosecution:
o Copyright owner can initiate a criminal case against infringers.

📘 COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT – POST 1995 AMENDMENT

Infringement via Software Use:

 Provision Introduced in 1995 Amendment:

o Any person knowingly using a pirated or infringing computer program is
punishable.
🧑‍⚖️Punishment:

 Imprisonment:
 o Minimum: 7 days

o Maximum: 3 years

 Fine:
o Minimum: ₹50,000

o Maximum: ₹2,00,000

👮 Police Powers:

 Police officers of Sub-Inspector rank and above are empowered to:

o Search premises.

o Seize infringing material.

o Take action without prior court approval under certain circumstances.

⚖️SECTION 63 – PENALTIES FOR COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 deals with criminal penalties for knowingly
infringing or abetting the infringement of copyrighted works.
🔒 Criminal Penalties:

 Imprisonment:
o Minimum: 6 months

o Maximum: 3 years (1st offence)

o Up to 6 years (for repeat offenders)

 Fine:
o Between ₹50,000 and ₹2,00,000

⚖️Additional Court Powers:

 The court may:

o Confiscate infringing/pirated copies.

o Destroy unauthorized reproductions or tools/devices used for infringement.

📘 EXEMPTIONS FROM COPYRIGHT VIOLATIONS

The enjoyment of copyrighted works is subject to reasonable statutory exemptions to

balance public interest and creator rights.
🔹 1. Fair Dealing – Literary, Dramatic, Musical, Artistic Works

Exempted if used for:

 Private/personal use
 Research or education
 Criticism or review
 Reporting current events (via newspaper, broadcast, film, photos)

🔹 2. Use by the State / Law

 Reproduction for judicial or legislative proceedings

 Official government functioning

🔹 3. Public Use & Education

 Public reading/recitation of published literary or dramatic works

 Short passages for instruction (by teachers/pupils)
 Up to 3 copies of a book for public libraries, if not available in India

🔹 4. Press & Publishing Freedoms

 Reproduction of articles on current affairs, unless rights are expressly reserved

 Reproduction of material from official Gazettes (e.g., Acts, Bills)
 Reproduction of material from government committees, unless restricted
 Reproduction of court judgments or orders, unless prohibited

🔹 5. Computer Program-Related Exemptions

Allowed if:
 For utilization or adaptation of a legally obtained copy
 To make a backup copy for protection
 To observe, study, or test functionality to understand ideas/principles
 For non-commercial personal use from a legal copy
⚖️CRIMINAL REMEDIES UNDER COPYRIGHT LAW

Provided under the Copyright Act, 1957 for intentional infringement of copyright.

🔹 1. Imprisonment

 Minimum: 6 months
 Maximum: 3 years

🔹 2. Fine

 Minimum: ₹50,000
 Maximum: ₹2,00,000

🔹 3. Search and Seizure

 Police officers (Sub-Inspector rank and above) have the power to:
o Search premises

o Seize pirated goods and materials used for infringement

🔹 4. Delivery of Infringing Goods

 Court may order that all infringing goods be delivered to the copyright owner

🔒 INFRINGEMENT REMEDIES – CIVIL & EQUITABLE

🔹 1. Interlocutory Injunctions

A temporary relief granted before the final judgment to prevent ongoing harm.
✅ Requirements:

 Prima facie case: A strong initial case on merits.

 Balance of convenience: More harm in refusing the injunction than granting it.
 Irreparable injury: Damage that cannot be compensated by money alone.

🔹 2. Pecuniary Remedies
Under Sections 55 & 58 of the Copyright Act, 1957
💰 Types:

 Account of Profits: Surrender of profits gained from infringement.

 Compensatory Damages: Compensation for actual loss to the copyright holder.
 Conversion Damages: Based on the value of the infringing goods converted to the
infringer’s use.

🔹 3. Anton Piller Orders

A strong, preventive civil order ensuring evidence is preserved.

⚖️Key Features:

 Injunction restraining destruction or further infringement.

 Plaintiff’s lawyers permitted to search defendant’s premises.
 Defendant ordered to disclose details of suppliers & customers.
📝 Origin: Anton Piller AG v. Manufacturing Processes Ltd.

🔹 4. Mareva Injunction

Prevents the defendant from removing or hiding assets to avoid paying damages.
📜 Legal Basis:

 Provided under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 of CPC, 1908.

 Court may freeze assets sufficient to satisfy potential decree.
📝 Origin: Mareva Compania Naviera SA v. International Bulkcarriers SA

🔹 5. Norwich Pharmacal Order

Used to compel third parties to disclose information essential to litigation.

📌 Use Case:

 When a party has been wronged, but the wrongdoer is unknown.

 Typically issued against an uninvolved third party who holds critical information.
📝 Origin: Norwich Pharmacal Co. v. Customs and Excise Commissioners
⚖️FACTORS IN DETERMINING STATUTORY DAMAGES

When courts assess statutory damages in copyright infringement cases, they consider:
1. Nature & Purpose of Infringement
→ Was it commercial or personal?
2. Flagrancy of Infringement
→ Was it blatant or subtle?
3. Bad Faith
→ Was the act done knowingly and dishonestly?
4. Loss to Copyright Owner
→ Actual or potential damage?
5. Benefit to Defendant
→ Did they profit or gain in any way?
6. Conduct During Proceedings
→ Behavior of both parties before & during litigation.
7. Deterrent Effect
→ Need to discourage future infringement.
8. Other Relevant Factors
→ Any additional aspects deemed relevant by the court.

📘 FAIR USE DOCTRINE (INDIA)

 Definition: Allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission under

specific conditions.
 India’s Version: Called Fair Dealing under Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957.
 It acts as an exception to infringement under Section 51.

✅ CONDITIONS FOR FAIR USE

A use is likely to be fair if:

1. Small Portion of the work is used.
2. Non-commercial or educational purpose.
3. No harm to the market of the original work.
4. The original work is published.
FAIR USE OF COPYRIGHT — FACTORS
1. Amount of Work Used
 Both quality and quantity matter.
 Even a small portion copied can be infringement if it is a substantial or important
part.
 Example: Taking a long extract and adding short comments → likely unfair.
Taking short extracts and adding long comments → likely fair.
2. Effect on the Work
 Courts assess if the use harms the copyright owner's market or ability to exploit the
original work.
 Also consider if widespread use of this nature would damage the market.

FAIR USE — ANALYSIS

 Quoting a few sentences/paragraphs in a class paper is typically fair use.
 Using an entire work is almost never fair, regardless of whether it’s free or not.
 Simply citing the source doesn’t make it fair use (though not citing can be
plagiarism).

FACTORS FAVORING FAIR USE

 Teaching, research, scholarship.
 Nonprofit educational purposes.
 Criticism, commentary, news reporting.
 Transformative or productive use (e.g., parody).
 Use of published work that supports educational objectives.

FACTORS AGAINST FAIR USE

 Commercial or profit-driven use.
 Entertainment purposes.
 Bad-faith behavior or denying credit to original author.
 Use of unpublished or highly creative works (art, music, novels, films).
KEY POINTS IN ANALYSIS
 Fair use vs infringement depends heavily on case-specific circumstances.
 There is no fixed rule on the amount of material that can be used fairly.
 The court decides if use is fair based on impact on the copyright owner’s substantial
interests.
 The borderline is thin and subjective.