This document provides an introduction to copyright law in India. It discusses that copyright law was first introduced in India in 1914 and is now governed by the Copyright Act of 1957. The act protects original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works. Infringement occurs when someone exercises the rights of the copyright owner without permission, such as by distributing or copying a work. The document concludes with a case study of Apple v Samsung, where Apple sued Samsung for copying the iPhone and was awarded $1 billion for patent infringement.

1. INTRODUCTION TO
COPYRIGHT IN INDIA
By Veeral Bhateja
Contact me : +91-8741810758

2. Structure of the Presentation
Three parts
(1) Copyright in India
(2) Infringement of Copyright
(3) Case Study: Apple VS Samsung

3. What is Copyright?

“The exclusive right given by law for a
certain term of years to an author,
composer etc. (or his assignee) to print,
publish and sell copies of his original work”
(Oxford English Dictionary)

4. Why Copyright?

Fair Play: Reward creative efforts. “Thou shall
not steal”

Exclusive rights for limited
time →prevent copying
or reproduction

Copyright is necessary →
encourage dissemination of
copyrighted works = public interest

5. England & Wales

Indian copyright law similar to England &
Wales. First Copyright Act in England (and
the world)

1709 → Statute of Anne.

6. Indian Perspectives
The Copyright Act 1957

7. Copyright in India

First Act in 1914, followed by the Copyright
Act 1957.
1957 Act: adopted many English
provisions, introduced new ideas and
concepts.


8. Copyright Act 1957 – Main
Features

Valid from 21 January 1958

Created Copyright Office and Copyright
Board

Introduced civil and criminal remedies
against infringement

9. Copyright Act 1957 – Main
Features (II)


Performing rights societies (rights for
instance, music royalties)
Definition of categories in which copyright
actually subsists

International copyright

Definition of infringement

10. Copyright (Amendment) Act
1983 and 1984
Objectives
 Berne and Universal Copyright
Conventions  grant of compulsory
licenses by developing
countries

1984 Act: discouraging
and preventing widespread video piracy.

11. Copyright (Amendment) Act
1992

Defined ambit of the Copyright Board’s
powers

Introducing special
rights for performers

Assignment and licenses of copyright
Rights of copyright owners


12. What Copyright Protects



Original Literary, Dramatic, Musical and
Artistic Works
Cinematograph Films
Sound Recordings

13. Literary Works




Novels, poems, short stories
Books on any subject
Computer programmes,
tables, computer
databases
Song lyrics

14. Computer Software
Includes
 Programme Manuals
 Punched Cards
 Magnetic Tapes/Discs
 Computer printouts
 Computer programmes

15. Infringement of Copyright
When (Copy)right becomes wrong

16. Statutory Definition

Copyright Act 1957

Infringement: exercising rights of the
copyright owner

Making, distributing, exhibiting and
importing infringing copies of the work

17. Factors Determining
Infringement
Copying
 Causal Connection
 Subconscious Copying
 Indirect Copying
Substantial Taking
 Unaltered copying
 Extent of defendant’s alteration
 Character of Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s works
 Nature and Extent of Plaintiff’s Effort

18. Apple VS Samsung
This case was filed on April 15 2011

19. Case Highlights
Apple sued its component supplier Samsung, alleging in a
38-page federal complaint on April 15, 2011 in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California
that several of Samsung's Android phones and tablets,
including the Nexus S, Epic 4G, Galaxy S
4G
and
the Samsung Galaxy Tab, infringed on Apple’s intellectual
property:
its
patents,
trademarks, user
interface
and style. Apple's complaint included specific federal
claims for patent infringement, false designation of
origin, unfair competition, and trademark infringement, as
well as state-level claims for unfair competition, common
law trademark infringement, and unjust enrichment.

20. Final Verdict
As a result of the combination of a sophisticated jury that
understood the nuances of intellectual property law and
abundant evidence of copying by Samsung, Apple was
awarded $1.049 billion in its patent infringement lawsuit on
Aug. 24, 2012. The jury was apparently swayed by evidence
that Samsung had copied Apple’s iPhone models that led to
a jury verdict that six Apple patents were found to be
infringed.