Copyright and copy-making - The Hindu Editorial with vocab - September 21, 2016
The Delhi High Court verdict that photocopying portions of academic publications to make
course packs for students does not amount to copyright infringement has been interpreted by many as a victory for the
wider public interest of ensuring affordable access to quality educational
material. The only question of law that arose in the suit filed by Oxford
University Press, Cambridge University Press and Taylor & Francis was
whether the making of course packs by the Delhi University by authorising a
photocopying store to make numerous copies of course material drawn from
different books amounts to copyright infringement. The court says copyright is
not a natural or common law right in India, but is subject to statute. It
proceeds to hold that photocopying for academic purposes is not an infringement
as Section 52(1)(i) of the Copyright Act permits the making of copies of
literary works by a teacher or pupil ‘in the course of instruction’, a phrase interpreted to cover whole academic
sessions, from the preparation of syllabus onwards.
Given that the law contains provisions barring infringement of copyright and listing acts that do
not constitute infringement, there is no doubt that the legislature wanted to
balance copyright protection with the public interest in ensuring access.
Interestingly, the judge sees the ‘no infringement’ clauses as being consistent
with articles in the Berne Convention
(agreement) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
Rights, which provide for domestic legislation to permit reproductions for specific
purposes, as long as they do not conflict with normal exploitation of the works
or unreasonably prejudice the rights-holder. The publishers have argued, in
vain, that universities should not allow unrestricted photocopying, but instead
apply for licences through the Indian Reprographic Rights
Organisation, a registered copyright society. The publishers may
pursue this aspect in their appeal, if there is one. The verdict may justly
raise the concern whether conferring unrestricted reprographic rights on
academic institutions will drive reputed publishers out of the field of
education. It is true that academic publications, especially international
ones, are expensive, putting them beyond the reach of many students. But the
question is whether the balance between the competing interests has been fully
preserved in the law. If reputed publishers feel that there is insufficient
copyright protection and back out of educational publishing in the country, it
will be equally injurious to the public interest.
verdict / / noun - an opinion or decision made after judging the
facts that are given, especially one made at the end of a trial
infringement // noun- an action that breaks a
rule, law, etc
No comments:
Post a Comment