The essence of a country's cultural development depends on its creativity in the form of literature, drama, music, computer programs, and so on. These creative works can be protected in the form of individual exclusive rights (i.e. copyright). It is the result of individual hard intellectual work. Therefore, if these works are not rewarded or protected, then the creativity and motivation of the author is stifled. Copyright laws are designed to reward these intellectual creations and to provide effective remedies if copyright laws are violated.

Before analyzing the various remedies provided for in the Copyright Act 1957 in India, this article will briefly discuss the copyright violations specified in the Copyright Act.

What is copyright infringement?

Section XI of the Copyright Act 1957 (Sections 51 to 53A) provides for copyright infringement. Among them, Article 51 of the Act sets out the conditions for copyright infringement.

Specifically, Article 51 (a) identifies two situations in which copyright may be infringed. The article states that copyright infringement is committed if, without the permission of the copyright owner or registrant, or in violation of the conditions of the licence, someone performs any act that can only be carried out by the copyright owner, or allows the distribution of the copyright work anywhere for the purpose of profit. Generally speaking, people cannot use "ignorance" or "failure to notice" as an excuse for copyright infringement.

Article 51 (b) further specifies the grounds on which copyright infringement may be considered. The clause states that copyright infringement is also considered if a person makes a copyright work available for sale or rental, affects the interests of the copyright owner by distributing the work, publicly displays the work in the form of a trade, or introduces any infringing copies of the work into India.

Exceptions for copyright infringement

Even the most important fundamental rights are not absolute. Similarly, copyright is not an "absolute" right. In order to protect the public interest of society, there are certain exceptions to this right, and these exceptions involving copyright are called the "fair dealing principle". The purpose of such fair dealing is to maintain a balance between personal and public interests. Article 52 provides that certain acts will not be considered copyright infringement. For example, the use of a copyrighted work (other than a computer program) for the purposes of research, criticism or commentary, or reporting on current events, or the use of a copyrighted work in judicial proceedings, the public reading or reciting of a reasonable summary of a published work, or the use of a copyrighted work for educational purposes do not constitute infringement.

Relief mechanism

The Copyright Act 1957 sets out the remedies available to copyright owners in the event of copyright infringement. Chapters 12 and 13 of the Act deal with remedies against copyright infringement. Once copyright infringement occurs, the copyright owner can take two kinds of relief measures, namely civil relief measures and criminal relief measures.

Civil remedy

Section 55 of the Act deals with civil remedies against copyright infringement. The above article states that when a copyright is infringed, the copyright owner is entitled to all civil remedies, such as injunctions, damages, etc. Of course, the defendant can also defend himself, such as saying that he did not know and did not have any reasonable reason to believe that the work in question was copyrighted. In this case, the copyright owner can only use the injunction and an order to recover the defendant's profits from the sale of the work to obtain relief.

In fact, after an analysis of the above provisions, one will realize that the Copyright Act 1957 clearly lacks an effective civil remedy mechanism. The bill is more favorable to defendants. For example, if someone infringes another person's copyright, then he can take various measures to prove that he did not know that the relevant work is protected by copyright, so as to avoid corresponding responsibility. As a result, the copyright owner will have only two forms of civil relief, namely an injunction and an order to recover profits.

Article 58 of the Copyright Act provides remedies for authors, stating that these authors will become the owners of all infringing copies and have the right to bring reasonable action to recover ownership of such infringing copies.

To some extent, section 59 of the Act even damages the copyright owner by prohibiting the copyright owner from obtaining an injunction or demolition order if the infringing building has already been started. This rule is designed to put the public interest above personal interests.

Criminal remedy measure

Section 63 of the Copyright Act 1957 clearly defines copyright infringement as an offence and sets out penalties accordingly. The article states that anyone who knowingly and intentionally infringes copyright or any other rights under the Act will be punished with a minimum of six months and a maximum of three years' imprisonment, as well as a minimum fine of 50,000 rupees and a maximum fine of 200,000 rupees. However, if the infringement is not for profit, the court may, at its discretion, lower the minimum threshold for imprisonment and fines.

Similarly, Article 65 provides that any person who intentionally makes or is found to be in possession of a plate that can be used to make infringing copies is liable to imprisonment for up to two years and a fine.

Article 63 (A) stipulates that penalties should be increased for those convicted of copyright infringement for a second or more time.

Section 64 provides that a police officer (ranking no less than a sub-inspector) has the right to seize all infringing copies of a work without a warrant and to refer the case to a magistrate as soon as practicable.

In order to meet the needs of the digital age, India has made further amendments to Section 65 of the Act by adding Section 65A. The article states that those who circumvent effective technical measures used to protect copyrighted works should be penalized, thus providing more stringent protection for copyright. Article 65B provides protection for rights management information, which stipulates that those who knowingly delete or alter such information should be punished.

It is well known that any criminal responsibility can only arise in the presence of criminal acts and criminal intent. Similarly, to constitute any offence under this Act, a person must have knowingly infringed a copyright work. If the court finds that the accused is innocent or unaware, he or she is absolved of criminal responsibility.

Conclusion

After an analysis of the Copyright Act of 1957, one can see that the law strives to provide effective remedies for copyright owners by providing both civil and criminal remedies. On the one hand, the Act does not provide appropriate civil remedies for copyright owners. On the other hand, the Act also seeks to make copyright infringement a serious offence by imposing penalties in the form of imprisonment and fines for copyright infringement. In order to bring the Act into line with current needs and to provide a fast track to relief for copyright owners, India makes various amendments to the Act from time to time. (Compiled from www.mondaq.com)