Copyright infringement can’t be allowed simply because it’s claimed to be within the public curiosity.
Tap to follow:
Copyright infringement cannot be allowed just because it is claimed to be in the public interest of the Avdhesh Parashar student of Maharashtra National Law University Aurangabad
RUPENDRA KASHYAP VS. JIWAN PUBLISHING HOUSE 1996 (38) DRJ 81
FACTS OF THE CASE:
The responding party / complainant Rupendra Kashyap is the owner of M / S Som Sudha Prakashan and the regulations for the distribution of books. He claims he is an exclusive licensee of the Central Board of Secondary Education in relation to the distribution of last year’s questionnaires for grades X and XII directed from 1990 and in this way within the meaning of Section 54 of the Copyright Act 1954 The first and first copyright holders, and none other than the plaintiff, were able to distribute or republish the previous year’s questionnaires for each class of CBSE-led tests. In each case, it is alleged that the respondents (Jiwan Publishing House) infringed the petitioner’s copyright by distributing and repeating the investigation material and subsequently filed a violation of the plaintiff’s privileges. The CBSE has the equivalent entirely on the side of the complainant / plaintiff.
- Can the question paper set by CBSE be subject to copyright?
- Who would be the owner of the copyright matter?
- Did the interviewee violate the plaintiff, right?
- Whether the plaintiff has a cause of action against the respondent?
Section 2 (j) of the Copyright Act 1957
Section 17 of the Copyright Act 1957
Section 17 (dd) of the Copyright Act 1957
The “original literary work” may be claimed under Section 13 of the 1957 Copyright Act. The prerequisite for this is that the work comes completely from the author and has not been copied from a source. The Court therefore ruled that examination papers for students also fall under Section 13 of the Act and are subject to copyright law. In addition, the court ruled that the examination papers were determined by a body (CBSE) and that the work of printing and publishing was entrusted to the complainant under a contract. The Board of Directors (CBSE) is considered a “public company” under Section 28 of the Act as it operates under the direction of central government and for public purposes. The High Court ruled that the CBSE board is the first owner of the audit paper and audit papers are copyrighted under Section 17 9dd of the Act. A contract for the publication and printing of the examination paper existed between the CBSE Chamber and the appellant. The complainant is an “exclusive licensee” of the copyright matter. The word “exclusive licensee” as defined in Section 2 (j) of the Copyright Act as a license which the licensee or persons authorized by him to the exclusion of all other persons (including the copyright holder) all in the Copyright of a work and the ” exclusive licensees “are to be interpreted accordingly. According to § 14, copyright means the exclusive right in literary works to perform the following actions, among other things:
(I) reproduce the work in any material form;
(ii) publish the work.
(iii) produce / reproduce or perform or publish a translation of the work and
(iv) make adjustments to the work. The above copyright insignia was found to have been licensed to the plaintiff to the exclusion of any other person. Therefore, the plaintiff is an “exclusive licensee” with the right to maintain a lawsuit for infringement of copyright.
Thus, the complainant is also the rightful owner of the subject of the copyright and his right is violated by the respondent by publishing and printing the questionnaire.
The Court found that the applicant had valid plea against the respondent. The court issued an injunction to the respondent and withheld another violation of the complainant’s right.