Source: Indian Express

Introduction

Recently, a bench of Justice V Sujatha of Andhra Pradesh High Court has exempted academic books from copyright infringement under Copyright Act, 1957. The court discussed several facets of copyright law.

What is the Background of Addala Sitamahalakshmi v. State of Andhra Pradesh?

• About Petitioner:
  • The petitioner is a publishing house that publishes books for students studying Intermediate, 11^th and 12^th class of CBSE and ICSE Boards, and for various engineering entrance examinations like EAMCET, IIT-JEE, and AIEEE.
• Filing of Petitions:
  • The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging a government order (GO) issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, which directed private colleges to compulsorily purchase books from the Telugu Akademi (respondent No. 4) for intermediate education and restricted private colleges from publishing their own books.
  • The petitioner also filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) where the petitioner was accused of violating Sections 63 and 64 of the Copyright Act, 1957.
• Petitioner’s Contention:
  • The petitioner argued that the GO is arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression) and 19(1)(g) (freedom to carry on trade or business) of the Constitution.
• Contention of Respondent:
  • The respondent contended that the petitioner has pirated and reprinted the intermediate textbooks published by the Telugu Akademi, violating the Copyright Act, 1957 and causing revenue loss to the government.
  • The respondent argued that the petitioner has no right to print the intermediate textbooks, which were copyright-protected works of the Telugu Akademi, and that the GO was valid as it aims to prevent piracy and protect the exclusive right of the Telugu Akademi to publish the intermediate textbooks.

What was the Verdict of Andhra Pradesh High Court?

• The court noted that Copyright protects original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works under Section 13 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Mathematical questions, scientific equations and laws of nature are not considered "original works" eligible for copyright protection.
• The books printed by the petitioner (publisher) containing mathematics, physics, chemistry, botany and zoology questions catering to students are considered non-literary works not covered under Section 13 of the Copyright Act, 1957
  • Therefore, allegations of copyright infringement against the petitioner would not constitute an offence under the Copyright Act, 1957.
• The court held that even if the petitioner's books are considered pirated copies of the respondent's books, it would still be covered under the fair use exception under Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957 for educational purposes for students' benefit.
• The court directed the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's legitimate business of publishing books, as the books printed by the petitioner are non-literary in nature and do not attract copyright violations under the Copyright Act, 1957.
• The criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner for alleged copyright infringement were quashed by the court.

What are the Legal Provisions Involved in this Case?

• Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957: Offence of infringement of copyright or other rights conferred by this Act
  • Any person who knowingly infringes or abets the infringement of-
    • the copyright in a work, or
    • any other right conferred by this Act, [except the right conferred by section 53A]
    • shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months but which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees:
    • Provided that where the infringement has not been made for gain in the course of trade or busines the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgement, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months or a fine of less than fifty thousand rupees.
    • Explanation.-Construction of a building or other structure which infringes or which, if completed, would infringe the copyright in some other work shall not be an offence under this section.
• Section 64 of the Copyright Act, 1957: Power of police to seize infringing copies
  • Any police officer, not below the rank of a subinspector, may, if he is satisfied that an offence under section 63 in respect of the infringement of copyright in any work has been, is being, or is likely to be, committed, seize without warrant, all copies of the work, and all plates used for the purposes of making infringing copies of the work, wherever found, and all copies and plates so seized shall, as soon as practicable be produced before a Magistrate.
  • Any person having an interest in any copies of a work, or plates seized under sub-section (1) may, within fifteen days of such seizure, make an application to the Magistrate for such copies, or plates being restored to him and the Magistrate, after hearing the applicant and the complainant and making such further inquiry as may be necessary, shall make such order on the application as he may deem fit.

What are the Landmark Cases Cited in this Case?

• Entertainment Network v. Super Cassette (2008):
  • The Supreme Court held that unlike trademarks, copyright is created under the statute, so an author's copyright must be determined based on the Copyright Act 1957's provisions.
• Krishika Lulla v. Devkatta (2015):
  • The Supreme Court held that copyright is a statutory right that requires satisfying statutory conditions.
• Warner Bros v. Santosh (2009):
  • The Delhi High Court held that making course-packs by photocopying does not infringe copyright as per the Copyright Act, 1957.

Conclusion

Karnataka High Court’s verdict on Copyright Law has marked a full stop over the question related to copyright infringement of academic material. The definition of fair use of exception under the Copyright Act, 1957 has emerged as a sense of relief for publishers of academic books.