sayali dissertation

Plagiarizing Of Information Online And Offline, Mash-up Videos
Submitted to
SVKM’s
Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies (NMIMS)
For the award of
MASTER’S OF LAW
IN
(Corporate Law)
By
SAYALI ANUJA ANIL PURI
Under the Guidance of
Ms. Munshi Kanse
And
Mr. Sanjay Kher
(School of Law)
(Mumbai)
2015-2016

School of law, Mumbai 2015-2016 Page 2
Certificate
The work described in this dissertation entitled “Plagiarizing Of Information Online And
Offline, Mash-up Videos.” has been carried out by Mr. Sanjay Kher / Ms. Munshi Kanse
under my supervision. I certify that this is his/her bonafide work. The work described in this
dissertation is original and has not been submitted for any degree to this or any other
university.
Date: 15/07/2016 Guide:
Place: Mumbai ________________
Asst.Prof./ Asso. Prof. / Professor
(Ms. Munshi Kanse)
Head,
Department of _____________ ____________________
Dean, SOL
(School of Law)
(Mumbai)

STATEMENT BY THE CANDIDATE:
This is to submit that this written submission in my dissertation entitled “Plagiarizing
Of Information Online And Offline, Mash-up Videos.” represents my ideas in my own
words and where others’ ideas or words have been included, I have adequately cited and
referenced the original sources. I also declare that I have abided by all the principles of
academic honesty and integrity and have not misrepresented or fabricated or falsified any
idea/ data/ fact/ source in my submission. I understand that any violation of the above will be
cause for disciplinary action by the School and can also evoke penal action from the sources
which have thus not been properly cited or from whom proper permission has not been taken
when needed.
This dissertation encompasses the information generated by me based on work carried out in
the School. I assure and hold full responsibility for its genuineness.
Ms. Sayali Anuja Anil Puri
Forwarded Through
Academic Guide (s)
1 Name of the Guide : Ms. Munshi Kanse
Designation :
Department of _________________,
School of Law,
SVKM’s NMIMS,
Vile Parle (W),
Mumbai – 400056
2 Co – Guide: Mr. Sanjay Kher

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:
First and foremost I would like to thank God. You have given me the power to believe in
myself and pursue my dreams. I could never have done this without the faith I have in you,
the Almighty.
I take immense pleasure to express my sincere and deep sense of gratitude towards Ms.
Munshi Kanse for introducing me to the course and motivating me enough to go for it. I
consider myself fortunate enough to work with her and getting a chance to learn under her
expert guidance. Her willingness to share abundant knowledge and expertise in this field has
helped me grow professionally.
I want to thank all my colleagues at college. They are the reason behind my successful
completion of this course and the same could not have been possible without their help.
I would like to thank my dissertation supervisor Mr. Sanjay Kher and Ms. Munshi Kanse for
their exemplary guidance.
I can barely find words to express all the wisdom and support given by my beloved parents. I
thank them for their unconditional love, endurance and encouragement.
I want to thank all my LL.M. batch mates for their friendship, help and co-operation.
I also thank Mr. Rishikesh Dave for his useful insights and for allowing us to use the facilities
of the department.
SAYALI ANUJA ANIL PURI

ABBREVIATIONS:
BIRPI…………The United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual Property
GATT……………………………………………General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
IP………………………………………..………………………………... Intellectual Property
IPR……………………………………..…………………………..Intellectual Property Right
TRIPS…………………………………Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
WIPO………………………………………………. World Intellectual Property Organization
WPPT…………………………………….. WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty
WTC………………………… …………………………………….World Trade Organization.

TABLE OF CASES
 Amar Nath Seghal v. Union of India(2002(2)ARBLR130(Delhi);
2005(30)PTC253(Del)
 Baker v. Selden. 101 U.S. 99.
 Barbara Taylor Bradford vs Sahara Media Entertainment Ltd. 2004 (1) CHN 448,
2004 (28) PTC 474 Cal, 2003 47 SCL 445 Cal
 Blackwood And Sons Ltd. And Ors. vs A.N. Parasuraman And Ors. AIR 1959 Mad
410 on 28 February, 1958
 Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma LAWS(KER)-1996-2-40 High Court Of Kerala
Decided on February 27,1996
 Donaldson v. Beckett (1774) 2 Brown's Parl
 Hubbard v Vosper, [1972] 2 Q.B. 84,
 Millar v. Taylor (1769) 4 Burr.
 R.G Anand vs M/S. Delux Films & Ors on 18 August, 1978 (AIR 1978 SC 1613)
 Smt. Mannu Bhandari v. Kala Vikash Pictures Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. AIR 1987 Delhi 13,
ILR 1986 Delhi 191
 Super Cassettes Industries ... vs Mr Chintamani Rao & Ors. on 11 November, 2011
 Vipul Amrutlal Shah vs Shree Venkatesh Films Pvt. Ltd. & ... on 10 August, 2009

Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:............................................................................................................ 4
ABBREVIATIONS...................................................................................................................... 5
TABLE OF CASES...................................................................................................................... 6
SYNOPSIS................................................................................................................................ 10
CHAPTER 1.............................................................................................................................. 20
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 20
1. History of plagiarism........................................................................................................... 20
1.1.1 Some of the great Plagiarist....................................................................................... 21
1.1.1 T. S. Eliot............................................................................................................. 21
1.1.2 Martin Luther King Jr........................................................................................... 21
1.1.3 Jane Goodball....................................................................................................... 22
1.1.4 Helen Keller......................................................................................................... 22
1.2 DIGITAL MEDIA PLAGIARISM................................................................................ 22
1.3 HISTORY OF COPYRIGHT ....................................................................................... 23
1.3.1 The First “Copyright” Dispute ............................................................................... 24
1.3.2 THE STATUTE OF ANNE – 1710........................................................................ 25
1.3.3 BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTIONOF LITERARY ANDARTISTIC
WORKS 26
1.4 History of copyright laws in India:-............................................................................... 31
1.4.1 The East India Company:-..................................................................................... 31
1.4.2 The Copyright Act, 1911....................................................................................... 31
1.4.3 The Copyright Act, 1957...................................................................................... 32
1.5 Fair Use ...................................................................................................................... 32
CHAPTER 2.............................................................................................................................. 36
Literature Review....................................................................................................................... 36
2.1 Plagiarism, Intellectual Property and the Teaching of L2 Writing : Explorations in the
Detection based Approach....................................................................................................... 36
2.2 Original Copy: Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-Century Literature ......................... 38
2.3 Plagiarism ................................................................................................................... 39
2.4 Steal This Music : How Intellectual Property Law Affects Musical Creativity.................. 41
2.5 Film and Television Distribution and the Internet: A Legal Guide for the Media Industry.... 42
2.6 Creative Artist's Legal Guide : Copyright, Trademark and Contracts in Film and Digital
Media Production ................................................................................................................... 43
2.7 Copyright Law and a Brief Look at the Google Library Project......................................... 44

2.8 New Media Theory : Mics, Cameras,Symbolic Action : Audio-Visual Rhetoric for Writing
Teachers................................................................................................................................. 45
2.9 Invention, Copyright, and Digital Writing ....................................................................... 46
2.10 Remix the book ........................................................................................................... 47
2.11 Copyright and Piracy................................................................................................... 48
2.12 How to Fix Copyright ................................................................................................. 49
2.13 Copyrights and Copy wrongs : The Rise of Intellectual Property and How it Threatens
Creativity (1).......................................................................................................................... 50
2.14 Intellectual Property Law Library, Volume 2 : Protection of Broadcasters' Rights ........... 51
2.15 Copyright Protection and Information Technology, An Indian perspective....................... 52
2.16 Law of Intellectual Property right................................................................................. 53
2.17 Law of Intellectual Property right................................................................................. 54
2.18 copinger and skond james on copyright ........................................................................ 55
2.19 Intellectual Property and Competitive Strategies in 21st Century 2nd Edition (English)....... 56
2.20 Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trademarks and allied Rights ............................ 57
Chapter 3................................................................................................................................... 58
Research Methodology ............................................................................................................... 58
3.1 Purpose of study:......................................................................................................... 58
3.2 Objective:.................................................................................................................... 58
3.3 Statement of problem ................................................................................................... 58
3.4 Statement of Hypothesis:.............................................................................................. 58
3.5 Arguments:.................................................................................................................. 59
3.6 Methodology:.............................................................................................................. 59
3.7 Scope:......................................................................................................................... 60
3.8 Tools: ......................................................................................................................... 60
a) Primary Data............................................................................................................... 60
Secondary Data:.................................................................................................................. 61
3.9 Research Design .......................................................................................................... 61
3.10 Limitation of the study:................................................................................................ 62
3.14 Definitions of terms ..................................................................................................... 62
1. Plagiarism:-................................................................................................................. 62
2. Copyright:-.................................................................................................................. 62
3. Mash-up...................................................................................................................... 63
4. Fair Use:-.................................................................................................................... 63
5. Moral Right................................................................................................................. 63

6. Public Domain............................................................................................................. 63
7. Parody:- ...................................................................................................................... 64
CHAPTER 4.............................................................................................................................. 65
Analysis and Findings................................................................................................................. 65
4.1 Articles in the Berne Convention .................................................................................. 65
4.2 Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers,Producers of Phonograms and
Broadcasting Organisations (1961)........................................................................................... 67
4.3 WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) (1996) ......................................................................... 69
4.4 What is plagiarism?...................................................................................................... 72
4.5 Video Mash-up............................................................................................................ 74
4.6 How does one identify plagiarism ?............................................................................... 75
4.7 Fair Use ...................................................................................................................... 78
4.8 Moral Right & plagiarism............................................................................................. 80
4.9 Copyright Infringement:............................................................................................... 82
CHAPTER 5.............................................................................................................................. 85
Conclusion and Suggestion ......................................................................................................... 85
5.1 The Thin Line Of Difference Between What Will Amount To Plagiarization And What Will
Amount To Infringement. ........................................................................................................ 85
5.2 Fair Use and Copyright Infringement ............................................................................ 87
5.3 Plagiarism in music composition................................................................................... 89
Some cases on music infringement:...................................................................................... 90
5.4 Would video mash-up amount to plagiarism or copyright infringement ........................... 91
5.5 Landmark judgments/ scandals of plagiarization (foreign and India).............................. 94
5.6 Should Plagiarism and Video mash-up amount to infringement....................................... 98
5.7 Answering the Hypothesis ...........................................................................................100
5.7 Mumbai University dealt with the Plagiarism Problem ..................................................101
5.8 Lacuna in the Copyright Act........................................................................................103
5.9 Future scope of research..................................................................................................108
Bibliography:- ...........................................................................................................................110
References:-..............................................................................................................................115

SYNOPSIS
Introduction (in brief):
This dissertation will talk about the elevated growth and instances of plagiarism in the Indian
research study. The cause of this is because today there is a load on the students to reach
deadlines, lack of encouragement to research, lack of expertise and absence of proper
guidance by supervisors. Secondly this dissertation will look into the present mash-up of
music and video given to the emergence of today’s “mash-up” culture, and the legal
uncertainty around the mash-ups, now would be the right time for policy makers to take a
new look at the copyright law. The dissertation will help to know how to manage plagiarism
and what will be the effective methods to put a stop to it and the remix culture how effective
and how should one define “fair use” for the remixed work.
Statement of problem
To find out the thin line of difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement
To determine how to curb the act of plagiarism;
Would video mash-up amount to plagiarism or copyright infringement.
Hypothesis:
Whether there is any kind of material which can be plagiarised?
Whether there is any kind of material which gets stolen more often?
Whether it is only the students who plagiaries?
Whether the advanced technology has made it easy to copy videos and remix it?
Objective/s & Rationale of the work:
The rationale behind the work is to give a comparative analysis of plagiarism and
infringement and bring about a understanding of what is original work and what is not.
To understand videos mash-up.

What is Fair use. Up to what extend would it be fair use (substantial material).
The rationale behind the work is to give a comparative analysis of plagiarism and fair use and
bring about a understanding of what is original work and what is not. After understand
plagiarism we will understand videos mash-up and infringement related to that and till what
extend the videos can or cannot be remixed and used.
Proposed Plan of work:
As I have taken majority of my information from my primary sources and basically from
books and cases and online URL ,therefore my plan to work on the dissertation research
problem will be dealing under the limelight of these books and cases as they give a better
understanding towards the objective of my study. I have gathered all the information from
online sources, for the access given from our college (NMIMS University) to the students for
reading books , plus I have gathered information by referring to books from the library.
These books and URL give us a brief description on the problem object and help us to come
up to a solution bringing about a brief and a concise study on the these object problem.
Primary resources: the main data will be will be taken from Statutes and Case Law. They will
form the basis of the research. It will be the backbone of my study as primary sources have
given me a clear picture of the problems that are being faced in the copyright world and
things that need to change
Secondary sources: additional data will be from the literature review with all the analysis in
the book, and various write up from the various journal and scholarly articles. Secondary
sources give us a analysis which is already assumed, in the topic.
Chapter I
Introduction
Chapter one will give us the brief introduction The history of copyright law starts with early
human rights and monopoly granted to printers of books. It started early from the ,
British Statute of Anne 1710, full title the Act for the support of Learning, by vesting the
Copies of Printed Books in the Authors or purchasers of such Copies, in the Time mention
within, was the first copyright statute during the 1710. Initially copyright on consisted to

copywriting of books and now it consists of computer software, musical, artistic, painting,
photographs and sound recording etc. The individual self is important in copyright because it
differentiates the creativity produced by an individual from the rest of society. In ancient
Jewish Talmudic law there can be found recognition of the moral rights of the author and the
economic or property rights of an author. This study will give us a brief discussion on history
of copyright from UK to USA. Early 1880’s was the introduction of conventions where many
countries together were bought under one convention for the protection of intellectual
property rights The Berne Convention was initially recognized in 1886, and was then re-
negotiated in 1896 (Paris), 1908 (Berlin), 1928 (Rome), 1948 (Brussels), 1967 (Stockholm)
and 1971 (Paris). The protection of the rights of authors in their literary and artistic works is
article I of the convention. In chapter one I will give a brief discussion of the Berne
convention strictly dealing with copyrights and various ways of protecting the copyright,
After which a brief discussion and definition of copyright laws in India and infringement
rights.
Chapter II
Literature Review.
As part of a thesis, the literature review helps you to show your information of previous work
in your field and to situate your own research in the context of this work. The literature
review will form one distinct chapters of this dissertation may also be part of the introductory
chapter or be incorporated as background for a number of chapters. However the review is
incorporated and it the total backbone on the field of my study
A literature review can have a number of purposes within a thesis.
Chapter II consists of a brief annotated bibliography of citations to books, and articles given
below in the list of references. Each citation is followed by a brief description of about 150
words descriptive and evaluative paragraph. The purpose of the annotation is to inform the
reader of the relevance, accuracy, and quality of the sources cited in the dissertation few
paragraphs of the book will be cited in the any of the chapters in the dissertation.
Literature review will give us a brief understanding of the research problem and the aim we
are trying to reach in this research paper
A literature review consists of these things as follows

It is organized around and related directly to the research question I am developing synthesize
results into a summary of what is and is not known identify areas of controversy in the
literature
formulate questions that need further research In my dissertation I have referred to in total 15
books, which pertains to a important part of my thesis. This chapter will explain the literature
reviews and offer insights into the form and construction of literature in copyright
specifically.
Chapter III
Research methodology
We will study cases on plagiarism, fair use, and give a brief description of copyright
infringement so that we can differentiate between plagiarism and infringement, and how fair
use plays a vital role in plagiarism. Our research will be “pure and exploratory” method, pure
as we are trying to solve our hypothesis, and exploratory as we have some idea about our
research problem, and also quality research as we have information and no statistical data in
our analysis.
Statement of Problem:
My problem statement is the picture of an issue at present existing which needs to be tackled.
It aims to prove the context for the research study and create the query which the study aims
to answer
To find out the thin line of difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement
To determine how to curb the act of plagiarism;
Would video mash-up amount to plagiarism or copyright infringement.
Hypothesis

And brief description of out hypothesis will be given and how the research will be conducted
keeping which factors in mind, how we will implement the study, and proving out
hypothesis.
Whether there is any kind of material which can be plagiarised?
Whether there is any kind of material which gets stolen more often?
Whether it is only the students who plagiaries?
Whether the advanced technology has made it easy to copy videos and remix it?
Aim
The rationale behind the work is to give a comparative analysis of plagiarism and
infringement and bring about a understanding of what is original work and what is not.
To understand videos mash-up.
What is Fair use. Up to what extend would it be fair use (substantial material).
Definitions of terms
Plagiarism:- The act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages
of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of
one’s own mind.
Copyright:- Copyright is a right given by the law to creators of literary, dramatic, musical and
artistic works and producers of cinematograph films and sound recordings. In fact, it is a
bundle of rights including, inter alia, rights of reproduction, communication to the public,
adaptation and translation of the work. There could be slight variations in the composition of
the rights depending on the work.
Mash-up:- A paper that represents a mix of copied material from several different sources
without proper citation or movie or video having characters or situations from other sources
or a Web service or application that integrates data and functionalities from various online
sources

Fair Use:- According to section 52 copyrights act (a) fair dealing with a literary, dramatic,
musical or artistic work [not being a computer programme] for the purposes of- (i) private or
personal use, including research; (ii) criticism or review, whether of that work or of any
other work (b) a fair dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work for the
purpose of reporting current events- (i) in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical, or
(ii) by broadcast or in a cinematograph film or by means of photographs. (iii) the reporting of
current events, including the reporting of a lecture delivered in public. Explanation. The
storing of any work in any electronic medium for the purposes mentioned in this clause,
including the incidental storage of any computer programme which is not itself an infringing
copy for the said purposes, shall not constitute infringement of copyright.
Moral Right:- Rights that the creator of a copyrighted work has to ownership and control of
the work, as recognized by civil law and some common law jurisdictions. Moral rights
typically include the right to the integrity of the copyrighted work, the right
to publish anonymously or under a pseudonym, and the right of attribution. Moral rights are
different from the economic rights rendered by copyrighting.
Chapter IV
Analysis and findings
Chapter IV will consist of the present findings, as I have referred to a number of book which
will bring a brief understanding on the topic of Plagiarizing Of Information Both Online And
Offline, Mash-up Video. The chapter will start with a brief definition of Plagiarization and
cases pertaining to plagiarization, and types of plagiarization. Today we have digital media
plagiarization the types are as follow
1. CLONE: An act of submitting another’s work, word-for-word, as one’s own.
2. CTRL-C: A written piece that contains significant portions of text from a single source
without alterations.
3. FIND–REPLACE: The act of changing key words and phrases but retaining the essential
content of the source in a paper.
4. REMIX: An act of paraphrasing from other sources and making the content fit together
seamlessly.

5. RECYCLE: The act of borrowing generously from one’s own previous work without
citation; To self plagiarize.
6. HYBRID: The act of combining perfectly cited sources with copied passages—without
citation—in one paper.
7. MASH-UP: A paper that represents a mix of copied material from several different sources
without proper citation.
8. 404 ERROR: A written piece that includes citations to non-existent or inaccurate
information about sources.
9. AGGREGATOR: The “Aggregator” includes proper citation, but the paper contains almost
no original work.
10. RE-TWEET: This paper includes proper citation, but relies too closely on the text’s
original wording and/or structure.
My study will give a detailed analysis of these types of plagiarization digital media, after this
in my study I will be dealing of mash-up of videos. How does one know if the video used is a
fair use? So to define fair use we need to keep these factors in mind
the purpose and character of the use,
the nature of the copyrighted work,
the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and
the effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
I will give a detailed analysis on “Fair Use” according to the copyright laws. What is fair use
and relevant cases. The famous case in the USA court of law Bridgeport Music, Inc. v.
Dimension Films, 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005), is a court case that has proved important in
defining American copyright law for recorded music. The case centered on N.W.A.’s song
"100 Miles and Runnin'" and Funkadelic's "Get Off Your Ass and Jam".
Essentially, N.W.A. sampled a two-second guitar chord from Funkadelic's tune, lowered the
pitch and looped it five times in their song. hence the court had passed a judgment to get A
license and not to sample because they did not see any creativity in the music.

Chapter V
Conclusion and Suggestion
Chapter V will deal with the thin line of difference between plagiarization and actually what
is not plagiarization Chapter IV will deal with the finding in cases and the reviews and
understanding, apart from that we will be dealing with fair use. We will be provide relevant
judgment and famous cases and scandals in plagiarization. It will be a brief discussion on the
findings on the cases and scandals what is plagiarization and how is it differentiate as today
there is a thin line of difference between them. After which we will talk about video mash-up
up which comes under copyright infringement and plagiarism.
One of the sub heads will be the copyright infringements which will deal with plagiarism and
upon infringement what laws will be used and will come which section. Chapter IV will give
us a details study, upon infringement which law should one refer too and till what extend one
can refer to that far or section will it be a civil or criminal law.
This chapter will deal with my conclusion and own finding, it will give a brief view that upon
infringement which laws and how do they apply. It will give a brief study upon my
evaluation on copyright and plagiarism. How important these matters are today how
necessary it has become to study thses cases and provide a safe outcome in these matters.
This chapter will be a brief conclusion on my finding and my method to deal with the
problems.
It will also deal with the lacuna in the copyright law mainly dealing with territorial
jurisdiction, that is issues with boundaries, were the cases have to be filed and will also deal
with the economical aspect, economic aspect of copyright infringement.
Future Scope of study
Today plagiarism is found in almost all fields of copyright : literature, music, design, online
offline etc. That is why nowadays a lot of notice is given to recognize and discovery of
plagiarism. We find that many challenges can be explained by lack of knowledge about the
legal or policy rules. Today there is a lot of misconception and confusion about the copyright
laws, among the content creator and consumers, they do not have sufficient knowledge about
these laws and hence need guidance, or need to be informed about the Laws.

In today’s world how can we minimise plagiarism?
How will the growing technology help one to curb plagiarism?
Is there any plagiarism prevention technology that could detect duplicate video content across
the web?
References:
 Plagiarism, Intellectual Property and the Teaching of L2 Writing : Explorations in the
Detection based Approach.
By: Bloch, Joel
 Original Copy : Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-Century Literature
By: MacFarlane, Robert
 Plagiarism
By: Marsh, Bill
 Steal This Music : How Intellectual Property Law Affects Musical Creativity
By: Demers, Joanna
 Against Intellectual Monopoly
By: Boldrin, Michele, Levine, David K.
 Film and Television Distribution and the Internet : A Legal Guide for the Media
Industry
By: Sparrow, Andrew
 Creative Artist's Legal Guide : Copyright, Trademark and Contracts in Film and
Digital Media Production
By: Seiter,Bill,Seiter, Ellen
 Copyright Law and a Brief Look at the Google Library Project
By: Rhodes, Brett D
 New Media Theory : Mics, Cameras, Symbolic Action : Audio-Visual Rhetoric for
Writing Teachers
By: Halbritter,Bump
 Invention, Copyright, and Digital Writing
By: Rife, Martine Courant
 Remix the book
By: Amerika, Mark

 Copyright and Piracy
By: Bently,LionelDavis,Jennifer Ginsburg, Jane C.
 How to Fix Copyright
By: Patry, William
 Copyrights and Copywrongs : The Rise of Intellectual Property and How it Threatens
Creativity (1)
By: Vaidhyanathan, Siva
 Intellectual Property Law Library, Volume 2 : Protection of Broadcasters' Rights
By: Ogawa, Megumi

CHAPTER 1
Introduction
1. History of plagiarism
"Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal" - TS Eliot.
Plagiarism, as said is copying someone else’s work without citation. Plagiarism is writing
someone else’s art or creativity and claiming it as oneself, plagiarism is not just copying
someone else work and claiming it as one’s own work but it also covers misappropriation,
faulty citation, imitation, cheating, copyright infringement as there is a thin line of difference
between infringement and plagiarism, would include plagiarism.
The word plagiarism is derived from the Latin word plagiaries, which means to kidnap or
abduct. The word began to be used in the English language sometime during the 1600s.
While it originally meant to literally kidnap someone, it gradually came to mean to pass off,
in part of whole, someone else's work as your own.1 Plagiarism as simple as the word looks,
is as simple to understand, plagiarism simply means acknowledgement of the authors work.
The plagiarist cleverly disguises the original text by seeking to hide his misdemeanour and
make us forget his source, the author of pastiches signals to the reader, through overwrought
stylistic devices, that a game is being played. He does not intend to steal the work, as does the
plagiarist, or steal the author’s signature, as does the forger. The author of pastiches is not a
cheat but a prankster.2
If we go back way in the 40 AD, we can say our first Roman poet Martial who introduced the
word plagiarism when he knew that his work was being misused by other poets, he was the
one who said that plagiarism was derived from the Latin word “Plagiarius”, Martial had said
that his work was copied by another poet Fidentinus use his Martials work and claims it to be
his own, during that era there were no copyright laws to protect the people from other people
who would plagiaries their work. Therefore Martial through many of his other poems pointed
1
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-times/Whats-the-origin-of-the-word-
plagiarism/articleshow/1519035.cmsAccessed on12th June 2016,
2
Stealing the Fire. Amsterdam, NL: Rodopi,2010. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 12 June 2016.

out at the poets who stole his poems and claimed it as his own, he made it a point to name all
the poets in his poems whoever had stolen his work, specially pointing out to Fidentinus he
had worse the verse,
“FAME HAS IT THAT YOU, FIDENTINUS, RECITE MY BOOKS TO THE CROWD AS IF
NONE OTHER THAN YOUR OWN.
IF YOU’RE WILLING THAT THEY BE CALLED MINE, I’LL SEND YOU THE POEMS
FOR FREE.
IF YOU WANT THEM TO BE CALLED YOURS, BUY THIS ONE, SO THAT THEY WON’T
BE MINE.3”
Martial has said that “Fidentinus” will not succeed in becoming as a great poet Martial is
because he lack creativity and expert, indirectly Martial tried to tell us that one needs to be
creative to produce his own original work and copied and work will not take the person far
away.
1.1.1 Some of the great Plagiarist
1.1.1 T. S. Eliot
Plagiarism is the fails to give credit to the original writer, another famous case of plagiarism
was, T. S. Eliot "stole" the famous opening of Shakespeare's barge passage, "The barge she
sat in, like a burnish'd throne, / Burn'd on the water" becoming "The Chair she sat in, like a
burnished throne, / Glowed on the marble."4 Eliot was knows the word kleptomaniac, in his
Famous book The Waste Land. Plagiarism in the broad sense is really ambiguous word as
there is no specific meaning given to it. Plagiarism can ruin a writers carrier, it can make a
living of a person shut in just the few verses he copies without giving the author proper
acknowledgement. These were the two prominent cases and famous cases through which we
understand the term of plagiarism.
1.1.2 Martin Luther King Jr
Martin Luther King Jr very well know politician in the United State during the 50’S and
60’S was a part of the civil war, had plagiarized his dissertation project when he was studying
3
https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2011/10/04/the-world%E2%80%99s-first-plagiarism-case/ last Accessed
on12th
june 2016 at 2 30
pm
4
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/04/on-plagiarism/302469/ accessed on 12th
june 2016,2
30Pm

to get a doctorate degree, Martin Luther King Jr was accused of using improperly sources and
material for this dissertation and not giving proper acknowledgement to the rightful authors,
in-spite of the plagiarism been known to the university they did not take any action against
the king.
1.1.3 Jane Goodball
The 2003 Modern Language Association (MLA) Handbook for Writers of Research Papers
recalls the Latin plagiarius in defining plagiarism as a “form of cheating” involving the
wrongful usurpation of another’s intellectual property5 as we approach the 2000’s era Jane
Goodball a very well knows scientist and a lady who is a animal activist wrote many books
on chimpanzees. Goodwill had plagiarised her book “seed of hope” in various ways, she has
taken paragraphs and various other sources from other places and had not acknowledge the
same to the respective authors, so much she has stolen material from Wikipedia and
Astrology sites and given it her own name, so much so she had copied various other material
from various other sources and not given proper acknowledgement to it (by proper
acknowledgment is I mean she has given acknowledgement at the end of the book but had not
specified where what is written) , her book was revoked from but later been released in 2014,
this was her first plagiarism and since she was a idol for many people, no such action was
taken against her.
1.1.4 Helen Keller
The Frost King was short story of The Frost King, written by Helen Keller who was just 11
years at that time , she had lost her eyesight at the age of 19 months, Helen Keller was
accused of copying the story of “frosty faires” written by Margaret Canby , there was lots of
similarity by the story line of both the books, Helen Keller was already a child celebrity by
the age of 9, but because of her young age she was not accused of plagiarism but the people
who were around her were accused her of plagiarism, we can say because she was young and
a blind she was not accused, thus after which she was not accused of any plagiarism in her
entire carrier.
1.2 DIGITAL MEDIA PLAGIARISM.
5
Marsh, Bill. Plagiarism. Ithaca,US: SUNY Press, 2007.ProQuest ebrary. accessed on Web. 12 June 2016.

What exactly is plagiarism? The Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines plagiarism as:
1) stealing and passing off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own; 2) using (another's
production) without crediting the source; 3) committing literary theft and 4) presenting as
new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.6
The Oxford dictionary defines plagiarism as "To take and use somebody else's ideas, words,
etc. as if they were one's own."
The rapid development and expansion of digital technology has transformed academic
dishonesty into "digital cheating" on campuses across the country. “In a 2006 article in the
New York Times, college educators and administrators addressed the issue concerning how
digital forms of academic misconduct have been on the increase”7. Digital forms of cheating
may not be dissimilar in kind, but could be less effortful, mainly with the ease of using a
copy-and-paste function to fit in others' digital text into one's own.
With the introduction of computer writing in the mid 2000’s, what we will call digital age
writing, came ubiquitous and highly useful functions “copy and paste”. Moving paragraphs of
texts around from one part of a document to another was not that easy; in fact, for people
used to the deadly physical cutting and pasting on the layout table. But Digital age is
supposed to be a boon, as they say, but it comes with its own curse. As the internet and the
World Wide Web brought the whole world together, it became possible not only to copy and
paste within one's own computer but also from the zillions of documents on practically every
conceivable topic under the tip of a click, readily available in the wide world of the web. Put
that together with the prehistoric urge of the dishonest writer to make it big the easy way, on
one said internet is a boon and a on the other side a curse, where it helps one to increase their
knowledge it puts a stop to the develop there capacity of thinking. Online plagiarism is
growing in India and outside India, with so much of available data available online and
different hosts and colleges providing us with so many research sites, instead of research
people tend to search of information that they can include in their work
1.3 HISTORY OF COPYRIGHT
6
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.svkm.ac.in:2048/docview/1698951455/49DDF4B165F42A1PQ/2?accounti
d=32277 last Accessed on12th
June 2016.
7
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.svkm.ac.in:2048/docview/908974952/1A32C11D1A6E407DPQ/7?accounti
d=32277 last Accessed on12th
June 2016

The advent of movable type in 1436 caused a production of books across Europe. It is
estimated that before Gutenberg’s printing press the number of books in all
of Europe numbered in the thousands, but that within 50 years, that number approached ten
million. Such volatile growth and its associated economic chance created an immediate need
for protection of the rights of both author and publisher from the earliest of literary pirates.
As we have seen the plagiarism cases, already mentioned above we could see the rise in
plagiarism.
The world’s first copyright law, the Statute of Anne, was enacted in England in
1710. Exercising its power under the newly adopted Constitution to secure the rights of
authors and inventors, Congress passed an act almost identical to the Statute of Anne as the
first American copyright law in 1790.
As books continued to be easier, faster, and cheaper to produce and distribute, domestically
and internationally, in Europe and North America, it became clear that enhanced protection
of authors and uniform international copyright standards were required. One such movement
for international uniformity led to the Berne Convention and its 1887 adoption of certain,
standard, minimum levels of copyright protection and their enforcement in the member
countries across Europe and elsewhere the world.
The present day is the locus of the most intense and most extensive expansion of
technological progress in recorded history. Thus, if history is any lesson, this is an era in
which broader, more secure copyright rights are essential to protect the rights of thinkers,
writers, visionaries.
1.3.1 The First “Copyright” Dispute
The first known dispute over ownership rights to the in print had word take place round about
560 A.D., resulting may be described as the first copyright settlement and the first
recognition that the ownership of a creative work is akin to ownership of other types of
property.
The dispute arose in Ireland among Saint Columba and Saint Finnian. Saint Columba ,
without the permission of Saint Finnian , copied a Latin Psalter which was owned by Saint
Finnian, who placed huge value on the literally work. When Finnian had the knowledge of
what had happened due to a small amount of his negligence, he demanded the copy from
Saint Columbia, but Saint Columbia refused to admit defeat. Saint Finnian then petitioned

Dermott, the King of Ireland, who in his verdict, which was in favour of Saint
Finnian stating, "to every cow belong its calf, so to every book belong its copy." The King
indirectly tried to tell us the original copy will belong to the original producer.
1.3.2 THE STATUTE OF ANNE – 1710
In January 1710, The Status of Anne bill was put forth before The House of Commons, and
after a lot of deliberation and revision , in April 1710, it became effective as the Statute of
Anne, “An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by Vesting the Copies of Printed Books
in the Authors or Purchasers of such Copies, during the Times therein mentioned.”8
“The Statute of Anne, was a small statute which included of eleven parts.
“ One, to promote learning.
 Second, to prevent any other person save the author to print or reprint the
book/literary work for a limited duration of 21 years in its retroactive operation.
The statute had an additional affirmative angle as regards the economics of publishing
involved in that it titled the same in favour of the citizen and any person could now bring a
complaint against the bookseller or the printer if they charged a price which such a person
conceived to be too high and unreasonable. This Act did not confer a monopolistic status to
the authors but only secured them the right to be entitled to their legitimate dues. However
the increase in the term of protection to the lifetime of the author was still due and took place
subsequently.”9
The case of Millar v. Taylor, brought triumph to the Stationer as their perpetual protection
of common right was upheld. However, this decision could not stand the test of time and five
years later, the House of Lords overruled Millar’s decision that no perpetual copyright existed
in copyright law. This principle of balancing the exclusive right of the author or publisher in
the work came with the historic judgment of the House of Lords in the case of Donaldson v.
Beckett. Queen Anne’s Statute was the first statute, which opened the gates for the law of
copyright in its true sense and afforded protection to the authors for their creative works, as
its prime objective, rather than protecting the monopoly of publishers, who indulged in unjust
enrichment of their pockets under the sanction of law at the expense of such ‘men of letters’.
The statute was indeed a turning point in the history of copyright laws.
8 http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Jan2015/7.pdf accessed on 12th june 2016,at 2:45 Pm
9 http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Jan2015/7.pdf accessed on 12th june 2016,at 2:45 Pm

As the first modern copyright law, the Statute of Anne recognized copyright as an author's
right, a major and important change in philosophy and in law. The Statute of Anne required
the authors or owners of the rights to register their works in the Stationers’ Company register
book as a condition of protection. Under this statute, if the author were living at the end of
the initial fourteen year term, the author would receive another term of exclusive copyright
protection for another fourteen year term.
1.3.3 BERNE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF LITERARY AND
ARTISTIC WORKS
The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, usually known as
the Berne Convention, is an international agreement governing copyright, which was first
accepted in Berne, Switzerland, in 1886 Following a campaign by French writer Victor Hugo
and his Association Littéraire et Artistique International the Berne Convention for the
Protection of Literary and Artistic Works is agreed. The aim is to give creators the right to
control and receive payment for their creative works on an international level. Works
protected include:
 “novels, short stories, poems, plays;
 songs, operas, musicals, sonatas; and
 drawings, paintings, sculptures, architectural works”.10
1.3.3.1 Madrid Agreement - 1891
With the adoption of the Madrid Agreement, the first international IP filing service is
launched: the Madrid System for the international registration of marks. In the decades that
follow, a full spectrum of international IP services will emerge under the auspices of what
will later become WIPO.11
1.3.3.2 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)1996
Hence after the Madrid Convention in 1893, the United International Bureaux for the
Protection of Intellectual Property (BIRPI) was established to administer the Berne
Convention from its city of origin. PIRPI moved to Geneva in 1960, for proximity to the
United Nations offices there. In 1970, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
was established to take the place of BIRPI, and in 1974, WIPO became a part of the UN. 160
10
http://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/history.html last Accessed on12th June, 2016 at 12.45 PM
11
Ibid

counties were a part of the Berne convention, time and again the Berne convention was
amended by making changes in the rights of the owner, in 1908 to make the duration of
copyright the life of the author plus 50 years, but that amendment was not obligatory for the
member, countries with a shorter term were allowed to keep hold to their present terms.
There are currently 35 countries in the world that have a term of life plus 70 years including
the US, UK, Germany, France, Italy and Switzerland. Two countries that have longer terms –
Mexico (life plus 100 years) and Guatemala and (life plus 75 years).
In 1996, the WIPO Copyright Treaty was adopted which had in its preamble:
“Desiring to develop and maintain the protection of the rights of authors in their literary and
artistic works in a manner as effective and uniform as possible, . . . Recognizing the
profound impact of the development and convergence of information and communications
technologies on the creation and use of literary and artistic works, . . . Recognizing the need
to maintain a balance between the rights of authors and the larger public interest, particularly
education, research and access to information, as reflected in the Berne Convention.”12
1.3.3.4 TRIPS (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) 1995
The TRIPS “Agreement had came into effect on 1 January 1995, is to date the most complete
mutual agreement on intellectual property. The areas of intellectual property that it covers
are: copyright and related rights (i.e. the rights of performers, producers of sound recordings
and broadcasting organizations); trademarks; geographical indications; industrial designs;
patents, including the protection of new varieties of plants; and undisclosed information
together with trade secrets”.
The Three main features of the Agreement are:
1) Standards: In respect of each of the main areas of intellectual property covered
by the TRIPS Agreement sets out the minimum standards of protection to be
provided by each Member. Each of the main elements of protection is defined,
namely the subject-matter to be protected, the rights to be conferred and
permissible exceptions to those rights, and the minimum duration of protection.
The Agreement sets these standards by requiring, first, that the substantive
obligations of the main conventions of the WIPO, the Paris convention for the
12
http://www.historyofcopyright.org/pb/wp_f12e0c69/wp_f12e0c69.html last Accessed on12th June 2016, at
12:50 PM

protection of industrial property (Paris convention) and the Berne Convention for
the protection of literary and Artistic Works (Berne Convention) in their most
recent versions must be complied with. With the exception of the provisions of the
Berne convention on moral rights, all the main substantive provisions of these
conventions are included by reference and thus become a duty under the TRIPS
Agreement between TRIPS member countries.
2) Enforcement: The second main set of provisions deals with domestic procedures
and remedies for the enforcement of intellectual property rights. The Agreement
lays down certain general principles applicable to all IPR enforcement procedures.
In addition, it contains provisions on civil an administrative procedures and
remedies, provisional measures, special requirements related to border measures
and criminal procedures, which specify, in a certain amount of detail, the
procedures and remedies that must be available so that right holders can
effectively enforce their rights.
3) Dispute settlement: The Agreement makes settlement procedures of disputes
between WTO members about the respect of the TRIPS obligation subject to the
WTO’s dispute. “In addition the Agreement provides for certain basic principles,
such as national state and most- favoured-nation treatment and some general rules
to ensure that procedural difficulties in acquiring or maintaining IPR do not
nullify the substantive benefits that should flow from the Agreement. The
obligations under the Agreement will apply equally to all member countries, but
developing countries will have a longer period”.
1.3.3.5 TRIPS According to Copyright Laws
During the Uruguay Round negotiations, it was recognized that the Berne Convention
already, for the most part, provided adequate basic standards of copyright protection13n as it
was said Paris Convention and Berne Convention had laid down the foundation for copyright,
they had laid down the standard in which copyright had evolved and what they had to follow,
TRIPS only went a step further, “Members do not have rights or obligations under the TRIPS
Agreement in respect of the rights conferred under Article 6bis of that Convention, i.e. the
13
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/intel2_e.htm last Accessed on12th June 2016, at 2:00 PM

moral rights (the right to claim authorship and to object to any derogatory action in relation to
a work, which would be prejudicial to the author's honour or reputation), or of the rights
derived there from”14
The TRIPS Agreement include certain details.
Article 9.2 confirms that copyright protection shall extend to expressions and not to ideas,
procedures, and methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such.
Article 10.1 provides that computer programs, whether in source or object code, shall be
protected as literary works under the Berne Convention (1971). This provision confirms that
computer programs must be protected under copyright and that those provisions of the Berne
Convention that apply to literary works shall be applied also to them. It confirms further, that
the form in which a program is, whether in source or object code, does not affect the
protection.
Article 10.2 clarifies that databases and other compilations of data or other material shall be
protected as such under copyright even where the databases include data that as such are not
protected under copyright. Databases are eligible for copyright protection provided that they
by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations.
The provision also confirms that databases have to be protected regardless of which form
they are in, whether machine readable or other form. Furthermore, the provision clarifies that
such protection shall not extend to the data or material itself, and that it shall be without
prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material itself.
According to the general rule contained in Article 7(1) of the Berne Convention as
incorporated into the TRIPS Agreement, the term of protection shall be the life of the author
and 50 years after his death. Paragraphs 2 through 4 of that Article particularly permit shorter
terms in certain cases. These provisions are addition by Article 12 of the TRIPS Agreement,
which provides that whenever the term of protection of a work, other than a photographic
work or a work of applied art, is calculated on a basis other than the life of a natural person,
such term shall be no less than 50 years from the end of the calendar year of authorized
publication, or, failing such authorized publication within 50 years from the making of the
work, 50 years from the end of the calendar year of making.
14
Ibid

Article 13 requires Members to confine limitations or exceptions to exclusive rights to certain
special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not
unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder. This is a horizontal
provision that applies to all limitations and exceptions permitted under the provisions of the
Berne Convention and the Appendix thereto as incorporated into the TRIPS Agreement. The
application of these limitations is permitted also under the TRIPS Agreement, but the
provision makes it clear that they must be applied in a manner that does not prejudice the
legitimate interests of the right holder.15
15
Supra note 11

1.4 History of copyright laws in India:-
1.4.1 The East India Company:-
Modern copyright law gradually developed in India, over a span of 150 years. The first need
of copyright law occured in 1847 through an enactment during the East India Company’s
regime. “The Act passed by Governor-General of India affirmed the applicability of English
copyright law to India. According to the 1847 law, the term of copyright was for the lifetime
of the author plus seven years post-mortem and could not exceed forty-two years on the
whole. Though the author decline publication after his death, the Government had the right to
give licence for its publication. The act of infringement was inclusive of unauthorized
printing of a copyright work for “sale, hire or export”, or “for selling, publishing or exposing
to sale or hire”. The suit for infringement under this act could be instituted in the “highest
local court exercising original civil jurisdiction”. The Act also specifically provided that
under an agreement of service copyright in “any encyclopaedia, review, magazine, periodical
work or work published in a series of books or parts” shall vest in the “proprietor, projector,
publisher or conductor”.16
Registration of the work with Home Office was mandatory for the securing the rights under
this enactment. However, the Act reserved the subsistence of copyright in the author, and his
right to sue for its infringement to the extent available in any other law except 1847 Act.
The Copyright Act 1911, while repealing earlier statues on the subject, was also made
applicable to all the British colonies including India. In 1914, the Indian Copyright Act was
enacted which modified some of the provisions of Copyright Act 1911 and added some new
provisions to it to make it applicable in India. The Copyright Act 1914, stayed intact in India
till 1957 when it was replaced and taken over by the Copyrights Act 1957.
1.4.2 The Copyright Act, 1911
he Copyright Act 1911, while repealing earlier statues on the subject, was also made
applicable to all the British colonies including India. In 1914, the Indian Copyright Act was
enacted which modified some of the provisions of Copyright Act 1911 and added some new
provisions to it to make it applicable in India. Indian Copyright Act 1914 remained applicable
in India until it was replaced by the Copyright Act 1957.
16 http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Jan2015/7.pdf accessed on 12 june, 2016 at3:00 PM.

1.4.3 The Copyright Act, 1957
In India, the Copyright Act, 1957 (as amended in 1999), the Rules made there under and the
International Copyright Order, 1999 govern Copyright and neighbouring rights. This Act has
been amended five times i.e. 1983,1984,1992,1999 and most recently in 2012.The Act is
divided into 15 chapters with 79 sections.
Moreover, the Central Government, by virtue of section 78 is empowered to make rules by
notification in the Official Gazette, for carrying out the purposes of this Act. Under the Act, a
copyright office was established under the control of a registrar of copyright who was to act
under the superintendence and direction of central government. The principal function of this
office was to maintain a register of copyright containing the names or titles of work, the
names and addresses of authors, etc. The registrar had certain powers like engaging in
disposing of applications for compulsory licenses and to inquire into grievance of importation
of infringing copies. A Copyright Board had been set up under the Act and the proceedings
before it are deemed to be judicial proceedings. The definition of copyright included the
exclusive right to communicate works by radio diffusion; the cinematograph was given a
separate copyright; the term of copyright protection was extended from 23 to 50 years which
was again extended to 60 years in 1992; term of copyright for different categories of work
was also specified. The right to produce a translation of a work was made coextensive with
other rights arising out of copyright. Provisions relating to assignment of ownership and
licensing of copyright including compulsory licensing in certain circumstances, rights of
broadcasting organisations , international copyright, definition of infringement of copyright,
exceptions to the exclusive rights conferred upon the author or acts which do not constitute
infringement , special rights of authors, civil and criminal remedies against infringement and
remedies against groundless threats or legal proceedings were also introduced.
1.5 Fair Use
Fair use is a judicially formulated concept, which enables us to use copyrighted work,
without the permission of the copyright owner. In a libraries, an information resource is used
by a huge number of people. The Copy Right law consider, for educational and research
purpose, making copies to some extent as "fair use". Fair use depends upon the percentage of
a document that is copied

Fair Use - What constitutes “fair use” is debatable. However there are certain factors that
govern fair use:
1. Purpose and Character of Use, i.e. is it for commercial use or for
non-profit educational purposes?
2. Nature of the Copyrighted Work - The fair use principle is
generally more indulgent for fact-based works than it is for
“fanciful” works, and also is broader for published works than it is
for unpublished works.
3. Amount or Proportion of the Whole That is to be Copied - Effect
that the use has on market potential or the value of the copyrighted
work.
Section 52(1), Indian Copyright Act, 1957 provides that a fair dealing (fair use) with any
work for the following purposes does not constitute infringement: 1) private or personal use,
including research 2) criticism or review, whether of that work or of any other work 3)
reporting of current events and current affairs including the reporting of a lecture delivered in
public17
By fair use we can judge if the work that is copied , plagiarised, will amount to infringement
or will it come under fair use, because only a fair amount of work can be used , under
different circumstances, in my subsequent chapters I will give a brief idea on fair use, and
what will amount to fair use.
what do we get in short Today’s high school students have grown up in a technologically rich
world; they are what we refers to as digital natives. Technology is flawlessly included into all
aspects of their lives and has become the plagiarist’s tool of choice. The appearance of the
Internet as an educational tool has created abundant opportunities for copying and pasting
from more than billions of Web pages. With the click of a mouse, paragraphs of text or entire
papers may be downloaded. The page can be then copied and pasted anywhere one feel likes.
Computers and the Internet are integral parts of the lives of today. The majority of people in
the United States have access to computers and the Internet, either at home or at school or at
work. People are exposed to technology at a very early age, and with the growing era.
Copyright is a legal right created by the law of a country that grants the creator of an original
17
Indian copyright act 1957. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1013176/ accessed on 25 june,2016 at 3:00Pm

work exclusive right to its use and distribution, usually for a limited time, with the intention
of enabling the creator to receive monetary benefit for their creative effort. The application of
copyright law to electronic resources is receiving more attention as technologies grow in kind
and complexity. The function of copyright as a means of protection for software continues to
be questioned. The rapid growth of electronic resources has precipitated revisions in
copyright law in the past decade.
Online reference manager tools have been recognised as one of the most advantageous digital
tools for present day researchers. They are the influential mechanisms which guide in
handling, organising and recording individual's research specially in formatting
bibliographies. Technology has altered the manner researchers used to provide footnotes for
the citations occurring in their text. Online reference management tools cater a researcher the
facility to import references from variety of sources such as bibliographic databases, library
catalogues and websites etc. A researcher can manage or edit the references if they are
available in the system and if he can't be able to find the references online he may add them
manually, but in spite of having all these amenities in hand people still plagiarise because the
amount of information available to them is and will the less knowledge they plagiarise
without the knowledge, as we know now we have plagiarism software to detect the any
plagiarism done in any write up or thesis or dissertation. There are various website where one
can enrol to find out if they the students works is plagiarised or if it not.
Today we have plagiarism check software’s/tools are available online as open source
software’s and commercially paid per licence. Almost plagiarism detection software’s
provide similarity report with respective original source of submitted document after
plagiarism checked. In digital age plagiarism detection service is very beneficial for
academicians, researchers and publishers to timely submission/publication of without
plagiarism.
There are two aspects which will be the primary focus of this part. The former deals with an
integral facet of copyright law i.e. the fair dealing doctrine; while the latter deals with other
threats or concerns that may be posed in general if Google is given the legal support, As we
know Google is a open secures to get information we can just on one click open around
thousand of sites relevant to out topic of liking, as we all know open sources are not reliable,
just referring to Google will not give us reliable information, with the rise of Wikipedia and
Google we will have enough information but will not have reliable information, how do we

know what is reliable , of what we should relay on? There this study is conducted to lay out
the difference, we cannot just copy and paste information without knowing if it is reliable we
need to understand the source we are taking it from.
Subsequent to this we will talk about video Mash up As society has moved into the Internet
Age, people are growing accustomed to having more and more data at their finger tips in
more formats about more topics As a means of competing commercially for surfers, traffic,
and revenue, and in some measure, out of sheer creativity, "mashaps" are now springing up
all over the Internet. A mash up is the result of an Internet application that blends or mashes
together two or more sources of content or data available on the Internet. While the potential
for new and exciting mash up applications is great, so are the legal issues that face mash
up developers. The provision of mashed Web services is certainly a trend of the future, but
the development of them is fraught with potential legal liabilities that require careful
consideration.
Because mashups by its sole meaning includes the combination of someone else's work or
data converted with the help of application ,into a new work. Mash-up can cause a various
legal implications that should be considered, preferably before a significant amount of time is
put into creating something new, the legal reputations should be knows or permission from
the rightful owner should be taken.

CHAPTER 2
Literature Review.
2.1 Plagiarism, Intellectual Property and the Teaching of L2 Writing : Explorations
in the Detection based Approach
CONTRIBUTOR Bloch, Joel
PUBLISHER Channel View Publications
DATE PUBLISHED March 2012
Below is a review of the book “Plagiarism, Intellectual Property and the Teaching of L2
Writing: Explorations in the Detection based Approach”, written by Bloch & Joel published
by the Channel View Publications. THIS BOOK EXAMINES or discusses the problem of
plagiarism. Plagiarism refers to the inappropriate use of what is called intellectual property.
In the United States, intellectual property is defined as creative acts that have been placed in a
fixed medium.
Chapter I Intellectual property differs from physical property in that, with often complex
restrictions, it can be borrowed, distributed and utilized without seeking the permission of the
owner, something that would be a clear violation of the law in regard to physical property.
Intellectual property is often given a fixed limit of protection, which is rarely true for physical
property. Ideas, on the other hand, are not considered intellectual property unless they are
placed in a fixed medium. The use of intellectual property, both inside and outside the
classroom, is governed by a myriad of often highly contested legal and ethical rules. Today,
there has been much concern about violations of these rules, what are sometimes termed as
the ‘plagiarism epidemic’ or the ‘piracy’ epidemic . As will be discussed in more detail later,
there is no general agreement as to whether such epidemics exist and, if they do, how they
should be dealt with.
Chapter II 2 Intellectual Property Issues and Plagiarism: over Both What Teachers Means
Second-Language the for Debate First and Writing tells us how authorship has been
revolutionised by the growing time uneven, evolution in the relationship between the text and

its author, often related to the development of new technologies. Walter Benjamin’s (1968)
view that the easy reproduction of texts, whether they are written texts or artistic images,
changes their intrinsic nature can be extended to the even greater ease of reproduction the
internet affords. Today, we often discuss the ‘death’ of the romantic concept of authorship;
however, in reality, it is difficult to discuss authorship as a single, monolithic concept.
The Legal Cases Shaping the Metaphors of Intellectual Property in Cyberspace Cyberspace
Has become an important factor in the discussion of plagiarism not simply because students
use it to search for information that can easily be cut and pasted but also because it has
evolved as a physical space for writing. One approach for understanding how the use of
intellectual property, whether it is from ethical or legal perspectives, can be found in the
study of the various court cases that have contested the control of intellectual property on the
internet. These cases are important for writing teachers both because they have provided the
constraints for using and distributing teaching materials in the classroom and because they
helped create some of the metaphors that frame how we think about plagiarism and IPR. It
tells us in detail of the landmark judgments passed in the field of copyright and infringement.
Gives in depth information of plagiarism and IPR connection.

2.2 Original Copy: Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-Century Literature
CONTRIBUTOR MacFarlane, Robert
PUBLISHER Oxford University Press, UK
Below is a review of the book “Original Copy : Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-
Century Literature”, written by MacFarlane, Robert published in the Oxford University Press,
UK.
THIS BOOK EXAMINES or discusses what is Original, according to American professor
Laurence J Peter, 'is the fine art of remembering what you hear but forgetting where you
heard it.'18 pitifully, Franklin P Jones, had said that Originality is the work of an artist to
cover his sources. This book gives a brief description of various poets and authors what they
think about plagiarism and who is for plagiarism and who is against plagiarism.
The books suggests that maybe however creative a person it something from somewhere is
copied, because creativity is added one someone else’s ideas. In the books it says that the art
of plagiarism is a sweet way to kill creativity, without attributing the author, and being a
disguise of that author is not only sealing the authors identity but also his creative mind
which the person does not have. They say not only does it only exposes the personality of the
copied author but how the carrier of the person is ruined and finsined by one of the act that
has been done by the alleged person.
18 MacFarlane,Robert. Original Copy : Plagiarismand Originality in Nineteenth-Century Literature. Oxford, GB:
Oxford University Press,UK, 2007.ProQuest ebrary. Web. 13 July 2016.

2.3 Plagiarism
CONTRIBUTOR Marsh, Bill
PUBLISHER SUNY Press
Here is a review of the book “Plagiarism”, written by Marsh, Bill published in the SUNY
Press. THIS BOOK EXAMINES or discusses the problem of plagiarism as well as a range
of techniques and technologies introduced over the years in an effort to solve it. It begin by
pointing out that what is termed as the “problem” of plagiarism tends to arise, and thus tends
to be treated (identified, punished, cured, even encouraged), differently in different domains.
Plagiarism infractions in most U.S. colleges and universities, for example, will likely bring
out different reactions than related crimes perpetrated by, say, top-selling popular historians
or avant-garde novelists. Nonetheless, the terms of the debate, and even the treatment of the
perpetrator, may at times turn out to be the same. I begin, then, by suggesting that plagiarism
continues to draw the attention of scholars and educators in part because the problem, while
often dismissed as a simple matter of textual misuse, betrays a range of complexities not
easily managed via simple, straightforward solutions. Basically this book give us a vide
definition of what is plagiarization and in detail understanding
Chapter 2 examine several description of plagiarism rooted in ideas of unsuccessful
authorship and intellectual property violation. It is mentioned in that chapter that recent and
most effective way to solve the plagiarism problem, is the internet software plagiarism
detection sites and applications that can be downloaded free , perform a particular type of
public control unique to post industrial technologies with the growing technology.
Chapter 3 speaks about early-twentieth-century plagiarism procedure and assignment writing
rules and regulations which including the “research paper” model that appear in the 1920s it
gives us a brief idea about how students copy material from library books or hard copy. I
further say that this book gives us a idea on how about offline material that is available to
students was also widely used by them to plagiaries and continue with the research paper.
In chapter 5, speaks about how one should ignore plagiarism, consider a range of research
writing on this chapter the author talks about the handbook of plagiarism, as to how to avoid

it, and tells us about paraphrasing plagiarism this is being used widely by students now a
days, there is very thin line of differences as students do not understand what is plagiarism
and what will amount to original work.
Chapter 7 in particular deals with my topic it focus on, analyzing four popular plagiarism
software that is Glatt Plagiarism Services, Essay Verification Engine , Plagiarism Finder, and
Turnitin.com. I say that these soft ware’s regulates healthy writing among students and show
them the difference and how to actually use their creativity how the teaches have taught them
overcome copying.
In the concluding chapter I considered that plagiarism in the age of internet and introduction
of computers has made it easy and most convenient to copy and hide the copying. this book
tells us one version of the internet plagiarism detection services, and there mentioned above
are the majorly used by different college and institutions and students.

2.4 Steal This Music : How Intellectual Property Law Affects Musical Creativity
CONTRIBUTOR Demers, Joanna
PUBLISHER University of Georgia Press
DATE PUBLISHED February 2006
Here is a review of the book “Steal This Music : How Intellectual Property Law Affects
Musical Creativity”, written by Demers, Joanna published in the University of Georgia Press.
THIS BOOK EXAMINES or discusses that would music amount to be a property or Under
what circumstances can music be stolen. Such questions lie at the heart of Joanna Demers’s
timely look at how overzealous intellectual property (IP) litigation both choke and encourage
musical creativity they are two sides of the same coin.
The book specifically signifies that, people who copy of plagiarise and more ignorant towards
the IPR laws and significance, with the Napster case it became evident to people of what can
be copyrighted and what are the laws which were actually used in it. It gives us a brief
description between plagiarisms and duplication, they tell us plagiarism id different and
duplication is different, plagiarism is a crime so is duplication but duplication is directly
copyright infringement and plagiarism only if proved to substantial use will amount to
copyright infringement, the book has discussed a verity of cases on plagiarism is right to
object to it not being similar right written work. It is clearly a land grab and is equivalent to
the enclosure of common land. It should be opposed. In the books it clearly states is when the
author copies someone else work and clearly uses that matter , and does not add or subtract
anything from it, hence when one is doing something like that attribution should be given.
The books states that the copyright office in USA, if someone samples anyone works for their
use, they give money to the copyright society n the amount of work that has been taken as a
sample and subsequently how many ever times the work is used , a reasonable amount is paid
to the society.

2.5 Film and Television Distribution and the Internet: A Legal Guide for the Media
Industry
CONTRIBUTOR Sparrow, Andrew
PUBLISHER Gower
DATE PUBLISHED April 2016
Here is a review of the book “Film and Television Distribution and the Internet: A Legal
Guide for the Media Industry”, written by Sparrow, Andrew published by Gower. THIS
BOOK EXAMINES There is no area of business that is more radically influence by the
outburst of internet services connected with computers, mobile phones then we have the film
and television industry
The internet is a medium through which the TV and Film content is shown to the viewers, it
not only give services of viewing content online but also updates them with news, telecast of
various other things.
This book tells us that Music Distribution and the Internet specially focusing on UK and EU
law focused on the distribution of television and film through the internet. This includes the
various contract and copyright licenses they will need to get and who all it will affect for
example studios, broadcasters, sales agents, distributors, internet service providers, film
financiers, and online film retailers. As we know internet is a global medium, i.e. we can
view anything is any part of the world, internet has not boundaries as the debate goes on.
The book focus on the domicile of the infringing state, it totally depends under which treaty
will the act prevail and if anyone of the country is not the contracting state it will not be
govern under that law, but under the law of that state.

2.6 Creative Artist's Legal Guide : Copyright, Trademark and Contracts in Film and
Digital Media Production
CONTRIBUTORS Seiter,Bill,Seiter, Ellen
PUBLISHER Yale University Press
DATE PUBLISHED June 2012
LANGUAGE English
Here is a review of the book “Creative Artist's Legal Guide : Copyright, Trademark and
Contracts in Film and Digital Media Production”, written Seiter,Bill,Seiter, Ellen published
by Yale University Press. THIS BOOK EXAMINES The Creative Artist’s Legal Guide is
here to help students and teachers, lawyers and professionals to understand copyright and
how to register copyright and try to give a clear understanding towards ti intellectual properly
and reduce the confusion. It gives us a brief understanding of copyright and the distinction
between the various types of work, that is artist, literary, musical, audio visual work, and
architectural work.
It gives us a brief explanation of derived work and and how is actually used and how much of
it will Amount to fair use. It tell us things that cannot be copyrighted like names slogans etc,
in short the chapter tells us the description of copyright law. Where on one hand it describes
that US copyright law protects ideas but under the convention TRIPS and Berne ides are not
protected as ideas can emerge to 2 people at the same time and one cannot stop that and give
a persona right of copyright.
Chapter 6 take a rounds internet and media it looks at the legal framework governing
the Internet and new media, it gives us a brief idea DMR digital right management, which
was introduces by USA so that there was minimum infringement on the internet or as we
know it the cyberspace. And has discussed the case of Viacom international VS YouTube in
detail about infringement and contributory infringement.

2.7 Copyright Law and a Brief Look at the Google Library Project
CONTRIBUTOR Rhodes, Brett D.
PUBLISHER Nova
DATE PUBLISHED August 2010
LANGUAGE English
Here is a review of the book “Copyright Law and a Brief Look at the Google Library
Project”, written Rhodes, Brett D published by Nova Press. THIS BOOK EXAMINES The
purpose of this monograph is to serve as an introduction to, and a starting point for research
about, the law of copyright. It cannot feasibly be minutely detailed in its text or heavily
annotated in its footnotes.
Chapter 2 deals with The Google Book Search Library Project, which was announced
December 2004,it had raised some important questions of infringing duplication and fair use
under copyright law. As we know Google had planned to digitize, index, and display bits and
pieces of print books in the collections of books under the Google search engine without
taking any permission taken from copyright holders, if any. The authors and publishers of any
book joined hands against Google for it but eventually Google claimed that they were under
fair use had not committed any infringement, although they had uploaded books on the site
they had kept a amount of the book hidden or not shown to the public, hence they would have
to buy the digitalize version of the book plus they were giving rights to the authors to take
down their books from the net whenever they wanted.
Chapter 3 discuss about fair use and Hyperlinking, in-line linking, caching, framing,
thumbnails. Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. The jury decided that thumbnails images would
amount to fair use and not any copyright infringement. In the following case it has been
discussed in detail how will one interprets fair use and how will one use it. And the 4 ruls or
fair use have been explains which have been explained in detail in chapter five of my
disserationg.

2.8 New Media Theory : Mics, Cameras, Symbolic Action : Audio-Visual Rhetoric for
Writing Teachers
CONTRIBUTORS Halbritter,Bump
PUBLISHER Parlor Press
DATE PUBLISHED November 2012
LANGUAGE English
Here is a review of the book “New Media Theory : Mics, Cameras, Symbolic Action : Audio-
Visual Rhetoric for Writing Teachers”, written Halbritter, Bump published by Parlor Press.
THIS BOOK EXAMINES various modes to write and cultivate writing, they try to bring the
thin line of difference between what is copied and when a student starts to actually write his
paper. They try to bring as understand towards the teacher the difference between copying of
audio and video. And how will it affect the students in today’s life, we all know audio and
video and technology advancement will only and only be a positive for the children, but we
don’t know when the line will be crossed between understanding and misusing the power that
has been given in the hand of the teacher which will be passed on to the students.
The New Media Theory series looks into both media and new medium as a complex
environmental and rhetorical context. technical dispute and chance of writing teachers from
beginning to end a conceptualization of writing and reading that could not have been
imagined by enumerators writing professors at the turn of the twenty first century it focus on
the contact that technology has made wiring very easy and on the other hand very difficult
also students who are lazy and who are not.
Rather than look to the formation and analysis of audio-visual texts as the goal of its
pedagogy, it even focus on digital learning, audio visual videos teaching learning process
great power and , as they make the topic friendly and legible to those who might not yet think
about themselves a part of regain and writing, only copying and viewing. This books bring a
thin line of difference between reading and visually seeing. How one can adapt to more or
writing or visually understanding.

2.9 Invention, Copyright, and Digital Writing
CONTRIBUTOR Rife, Martine Courant
PUBLISHER Southern Illinois University Press
DATE PUBLISHED January 2013
LANGUAGE English
Here is a review of the book “Invention, Copyright, and Digital Writing”, written
Rife, Martine Courant published by Southern Illinois University Press. THIS BOOK
EXAMINES the author believes that copyright laws are amended every now and then hence
with every amendment something new is added and a new understanding given it gives us a
fair understanding towards copyright and fair use through the convention and various law
governed in that country it manipulate on writing environments and pedagogies they are
coming to terms with the very real effects of policies and legislation meant to address issues
of copyright and fair use.
The book talks about internet and how content on the internet is broken and
sometimes dose not link up, it simply means that parts of contents are copied from on are and
pasted in somewhere else hence making it simple not to catch plagiarism. The books analyse
and say poets ad curative artistic focus on finding out plagiarism in the book we are trying to
focus on protecting the author and detecting plagiarism, and protecting the authors work and
prevent plagiarism of his work. It even focus that if someone is copying someone else’s work
one should attribute that work and give acknowledgement to the respected person or author.

2.10 Remix the book
CONTRIBUTOR Amerika, Mark
PUBLISHER University of Minnesota Press
LANGUAGE English
Here is a review of the book “remix the book”, written Amerika, Mark published by
University of Minnesota Press. THIS BOOK EXAMINES people who produce remix of
music usually believe the new outcome or the fresh music or writing is now the book
investigates that people who usually remix have a good sense of understanding on their
subject and they remix the book or music because they have a hood skill of mixing the
subject matter. They usually remix the work so well that it is impossible to recognize the
original source.
Remix the book tell us that that the person who is remix the book has usually not taken
permission from the author, sometimes those work is used for lectures and creative work
when the person has not got permission from the author, it would amount to plagiarism,
because substantial use has not been given a perfect definition, on how much of the part
would amount to be a substantial part it can either be one sentence or it can the entire article.
Sometimes hotels and restaurants just pick up few videos clips and use it for their own use.
And add their own logo and name, hence would be infringement but plagiarisers then can
approach the court and ask for injunction.
The book focus on right appropriate awknowldgemnt should be given to the work and remix
should be given but with appropriation and this book is just a starting point towards the
understanding of creativity.

2.11 Copyright and Piracy
CONTRIBUTORS Bently,LionelDavis,Jennifer
Ginsburg, Jane C.
PUBLISHER Cambridge University Press
DATE PUBLISHED October 2010
LANGUAGE English
Here is a review of the book “Copyright and Piracy”, written Bently,LionelDavis,Jennifer
Ginsburg, Jane C. published by Cambridge University Press. THIS BOOK EXAMINES
bring about an understanding of law and infringement, not only the lawyers are involved in
this but also historians , technologists, sociologists and criminologists. It brings to our
understanding if copyright laws need to made more rigorous or is it easy or how should we
make the appropriate changes that are needed while we keep the efficacy of copyright as an
incentive-mechanism for persons who require it.
In this book Pragmatic Plagiarism, Marilyn Randall classify plagiarism as a realistic, rather
than a written sort, meaning it is ‘principally determined by a wide variety of extra-textual
criteria that constitute the aesthetic, institutional and cultural contexts of production and
reception of the work’. Thus, plagiarism is a judgement, sometimes work cannot be copied it
has to be used as it is hence it would not amount to plagiarism only if the attribution is given.
In the United Kingdom, plagiarism and infringement is used interchangeably even in fine if a
considerable portion of the work it used it would amount to infringement of the protected
work hence copyright and plagiarism have in common certain characteristics. Plagiarism is
theft, and the existences of theft presuppose the existence of property. We have to keep in
mind first even without copyright law plagiarism was detected by MARTAL and it has been
know for a long time.

2.12 How to Fix Copyright
CONTRIBUTOR Patry, William
PUBLISHER Oxford University Press, USA
DATE PUBLISHED November 2011
LANGUAGE English
In HOW TO FIX COPYRIGHT, William Party offers his opinion concerning the trouble that
snowed under copyright. Party, like many others consider that copyright does not serve its
stated purpose of incentivizing the formation and distribution of new imaginative workings.
Copyright helps those who have or have written or produces something creative. This book
focus on how to improve copyright law and how effective it is and how useful it will be in
our near future.
Copyright laws the author has the right it delegate his power to the whoever he wants to give
it to he has the right to collect royalty in his name. Although since the work is out and in the
hands of everyone one cannon fix the piracy but it can put a curb to it but imposing fine and
taking a part of that royally of that work
Everyone knows that creativity once open in the market is free for all and can be used by
anyone and can be enhanced by anyone, authors are basically creative person and they do not
exploited that work the copyright holder exploited the work of the authors.
There is no way to fix piracy we need to make our laws more strict and teach the people that
only when the economy will grow slowly only then will the copyright laws or statues be more
strong for the people.

2.13 Copyrights and Copy wrongs : The Rise of Intellectual Property and How it
Threatens Creativity (1)
CONTRIBUTOR Vaidhyanathan, Siva
PUBLISHER NYU Press
LANGUAGE English
Siva Vaidhyanathan’s Copyrights and Copywrongswith the rise in creative and trends
in the market it has given a rice in Copyright Law and intellectual property. He has discussed
some Historical case studies. Starting from the history of United States copyright law, and
how it is difference to its European antecedent, Vaidhyanathan shows that the copyright law
was includes because it wanted to enhance creativity and people who are really smart and
creative would come forward and protect their work. Vaidhyanathan even said that copyright
is best at promoting science and art when it is less restrictive.
Finally, the very idea of “intellectual property,” and the recent international legal convections
which were introduced has become very dangerous and it should not be so rigid..
Vaidhyanathan does not abolish copyright it only says that people who are licensing their
material should be awarded so they can come up with more creativity and it would be better
for the growth of creativity.
Vidhyati says that copyright will be at it weakest if it starts collecting royally from tee
copyright owned, people would only run in the rat race and would not much of help to bring
up creativity in the market.

2.14 Intellectual Property Law Library, Volume 2 : Protection of Broadcasters'
Rights
CONTRIBUTOR Ogawa, Megumi
PUBLISHER Martinus Nijhoff
DATE PUBLISHED December 2005
LANGUAG English
This book deals with a highly topical area: the protection of broadcasters' rights. It is
an area in which the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) at that time has was
just drafted and it was reaching it final stage of signing. The author looks into the formation
development in the legislation for the protection of broadcasters' rights, and discusses the
current legal issues arising out of current world.
It protects the broadcasters right in two different countries if it is produced in one
court and infringered in another country which law would prevail,. "this books give a legal
understand of broadcasters right under the WIPO treaty and how one protects it right even
from attribution of this right.

2.15 Copyright Protection and Information Technology, An Indian perspective
CONTRIBUTOR Dr Fareed Ahmad Rafiqi
PUBLISHER Law Publisher (india) Pvt. Ltd.
DATE PUBLISHED November , 2011
LANGUAG English
Here is a review of the book “Copyright Protection and Information Technology, An Indian
perspective”, written Dr Fareed Ahmad Rafiqi published by Law Publisher (india) Pvt. Ltd..
THIS BOOK EXAMINES give us a brief study of the history of copyright and the study of
what is fair use and copyright infringement, brief description on the Berne Convention.
TRIPS, Rome convention.
In chapter III the different between idea expression dichotomy is given and why ideas are not
copyrights in the Indian copyright act. A brief study of data base copyright is given and if the
if there any sort of infringement that has occurred then the data base can be tracked down and
the infringement can be resolved.
In chapter IV a study of what is internet how it is protected and file copying and sharing and
napater chase been discussed. A few provisions on the information technology act has also
been included in the book.
Chapter VI include the copyright infringement and remedies, copyright infringements in
details is explained its civil and criminals remedies , DMR technology and copyright
protecting according to the Indian perspective and fair use.

2.16 Law of Intellectual Property right
CONTRIBUTOR V J Taraporevala
PUBLISHER Thomson Reuters.
DATE PUBLISHED November , 2013
LANGUAG English
Here is a review of the book “Law of Intellectual Property right”, V J Taraporevala published
by Thomson Reuters.. THIS BOOK EXAMINES give us a brief study of the history of
copyright and the study of what is fair use and copyright infringement.
It has given us the Indian perspective of copyright law with meaning and definitions of
various terms, not only does it tell us that work is protected it even cover detailed case studies
of various case studies of famous supreme court and high court cases.
It gives us a bared disruption in easily of what is original work and what is not, in detail
meaning of infringement and who can sue and what rights the person can sue.

2.17 Law of Intellectual Property right
CONTRIBUTOR Dr B.L. Wadehra
PUBLISHER Universal Law Publishing Co
DATE PUBLISHED 5th Edition, November , 2015
LANGUAG English
Here is a review of the book “Law of Intellectual Property right”, Dr B.L. Wadehra published
by Universal Law Publishing Co. THIS BOOK EXAMINES give us a brief study of the
history of copyright and the study of what is fair use and copyright infringement.
It tells us that copyright is a universal right and a unique, from it being a positive right,
majority of the authors call it to be negative right. Copyright according to the black law
diction means a right in literally property as assigned and recognised by the positive law.
It gives us the explanation of each and every right the copyright holder has, from the bundle
of right to the fights that have been given up by the author upon transfer of the right, although
the book is more technique but it is also very reasonable and easy to understand fair use and
copyright law.

2.18 copinger and skond james on copyright
CONTRIBUTOR Kevin Garnett & Gillian Davies
PUBLISHER South Asian Edition
Volume II
DATE PUBLISHED 15th Edition, November , 2005
LANGUAG English
The book focus on the copyright, copyright design and patents act, broadcasters act,
regulations under the broadcasters rights. Publication right, database rights, precedents of
courts etc.
Under the copyright design and patents act 1988 UK , certain rights were five under article84
which starts false attribution work this is basically knows as moral right if someone fatly
appropriates ones work as someone else he will be intriguing the right of the author and he
will be barred under that statue and injection will be passed if it is any artistic work and if not
then civil and criminal remedy.

2.19 Intellectual Property and Competitive Strategies in 21st Century 2nd Edition
(English)
CONTRIBUTOR Sahid Alikhan & Raghunath Mashlkar
PUBLISHER Kluwer Law International
LANGUAGE English
This book on intellectual property right basically focus on the 21st century , As the authors of
the book are well knows and eminent in the intellectual property world, the books tells us
that intellectual property has a great value in today’s world. They have given us a brief
description on WTO in the globalization world in their chapter 2 it mainly focus on the
positive and the negative and the borderless world, intellectually property id freely avaibles in
all the countries , how does one protect it and how can one see how effective is the borderless
policy, is it effective enough or is it harmful.
The book point out that previously without the borderless technology it was easier to copy
and find the infringer, and punish him for his crime, but with the growing technology and
work avaibles almost in every corner of the world, it has become easy to find the infringer but
tuff to penalise the person , as the source cannot be located from where it has emerged.
The had also given a brief description of the emergence of TRIPS and WTO how both the
conventions lack in a particular way and needs to be done for the get bring it upto par with
the emergent technology or the growing technology.
As the book totally deals with all intellectual property focusing on all the aspect os the
property Patents Trademarks Copyright. It focus mainly on the technology and the growth in
the Economy, Ecommerce internet domain and other aspects in detail in the book.

2.20 Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright, Trademarks and allied Rights
CONTRIBUTOR W. Cornnish & D. Llewelyn
PUBLISHER Sweet & Maxwell
DATE PUBLISHED 2007
LANGUAGE English
This book talks about, in the academic front this book is very helpful for the students and
lawyers who are new to this field, it gives us information of the different types , it gives us a
brief discretion on intellectually property ,
Since we are focusing on copyright a details analysis and cases and have been given in the
book, chapter 12 if the books talks about appropriation and how appropriation amount to
copyright infringement, it has given a brief description in the type of appropriating and
copying, which extends and what should one do as one knows it has been missued what
should one do.

Chapter 3
Research Methodology
3.1 Purpose of study:
In this chapter a hypothetical structure and method had been adopted to carry out the study as
discussed above. It outlines the scope of the study and research objectives and the set of
methods that has been adopted to accomplish the objectives. It explains in detail as the
navigator of our study for the detection of a suitable tools for my study. The tools and
techniques followed for analyzing the data for the study are also dealt in this section.
3.2 Objective:
 The rationale behind the work is to give a comparative analysis of plagiarism and
infringement and bring about an understanding of what is original work and what is
not.
 To understand videos mash-up.
 What is Fair use. Up to what extend would it be fair use (substantial material).
3.3 Statement of problem
 To find out the thin line of difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement
 To determine how to curb the act of plagiarism;
 Would video mash-up amount to plagiarism or copyright infringement
3.4 Statement of Hypothesis:
 Whether there is any kind of material which can be plagiarised?
 Whether there is any kind of material which gets stolen more often?
 Whether it is only the students who plagiaries?
 Whether the advanced technology has made it easy to copy videos and remix it?

3.5 Arguments:
 Why plagiarism check is needed?
Plagiarism is bad and morally wrong even if no law or license is violated. It shows the short
comings of intellect or intellectual integrity or honesty. Originality is the key towards
creativity and intellectual profession. Plagiarism threatens the core values of learning and
study. Plagiarism is just unethical, in copyright infringement they have only two parties, one
the author and second the infringer, but in plagiarism you’re not only fooling both the parties
but also the viewers or readers of that subject.
 Increase in plagiarism
In today’s world with increase in the technology, and free usage of internet and various other
software it has become difficult to curb plagiarism, as the technology is growing are is the
various types of cheating, firstly we need to understand what is plagiarism and then lay down
the difference between plagiarism and what is not, sometimes it is really hard to lay down the
difference, in the academic front it is not easy to explain it to the student, why one so not
copy so hence strict rules are made for plagiarism.
 What is lost when one plagiarises?
The dignity and respect earned from an original achievement and one can in no way neglect
that. It will be very differentiate between the original, notable sources and the derivative in
academia, industry, etc. It does not only diminishes value of originality, innovation but will
also be highly pursued, takes away the right of the author of his idea or thought. We need to
motivate the viewers through writing.
3.6 Methodology:
a) The primary sources of data collection will be from Berne
Convention 1971, World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 1967,
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 1995, THE
Universal Copyright Convention (1952), The Copyright Act 1956, The WIPO
Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) (1996), Digital Millennium
Copyright Act. The material has been collected through direct observation
forming the primary data.

b) This research will comprise of the existing statutes and case
studies that is the history, the relevant cases and causes of the research
hypothesis.
c) Studying the regulatory structure, finding out the lacuna in the
statutes by reviewing various case laws and various articles from the
convention and sections in the in law and studying the impact on the system.
d) Analyzing the statutes and suggesting ways for a better
regulatory system.
3.7 Scope:
a. The research includes the study of copyright infringement and plagiarism where we
know there is a huge differences between the two concepts, only finding out the
difference between them needed, and through this research with the statues and case
laws we will lay out the difference.
b. The research would include study of regulatory structures in India and the various
Convention.
3.8 Tools:
The information for the thesis would be collected through following modes:
a) Primary Data:
Statutes:
I. Berne Convention 1971,
II. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 1967,
III. Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 1995,
IV. THE Universal Copyright Convention (1952),
V. The Copyright Act 1956,
VI. The WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) (1996),
VII. Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
Case Laws: INDIAN
I. Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma (fair dealing)
II. Super Cassettes Industries ... vs Mr Chintamani Rao & Ors. on 11
November, 2011 (fair dealing)

III. Vipul Amrutlal Shah vs Shree Venkatesh Films Pvt. Ltd. & ... on 10
August, 2009
IV. Smt. Mannu Bhandari v. Kala Vikash Pictures Pvt. Ltd. and
Anr. (1986)moral right
V. Amar Nath Seghal v. Union of India(2002(2)ARBLR130(Delhi);
2005(30)PTC253(Del))moral right
VI. Blackwood And Sons Ltd. And Ors. vs A.N. Parasuraman And Ors. on 28
February, 1958 (fair dealing)
VII. R.G Anand vs M/S. Delux Films & Ors on 18 August, 1978
VIII. Barbara Taylor Bradford vs Sahara Media Entertainment Ltd. on 16 July,
2003,
Case Laws Foreign
I. Hubbard v Vosper, [1972] 2 Q.B. 84, (fair dealing)
II. Baker v. Selden (expression not idea)
III. Millar v. Taylor
IV. Donaldson v. Beckett
Secondary Data:
I. Written Material derived from available Books from our online database,
on Internet and Research Papers.
II. Study of Rules and Regulations on Conventions by various authors.
III. Appropriate analytical tools will be used for analyzing the data.
IV. Appropriate data in terms of conceptually equivalence would be taken.
3.9 Research Design
The research design is a framework for conducting the research. It involves the various steps
ranging from the definition of the information needed. The research design for my study is
primarily exploratory and descriptive in nature. It is exploratory because at the initial stage it
involves the provision of insights for the research topic and a deep understanding towards the
problem situation hence it led me to formulation of the research problem to develop the
objectives of the study and separate the key limit of the study and plan the future course of
action. The descriptive research is a sort of conclusive research. It makes an effort to portray
a systematic situation, problem, it also describes the description of the respondents and the
degree of association or relationship between the variables being studied. It helps to make a

predictions not exactly but it gives a roundabout solution to the hypothesis which has been
formed in the dissertation. These two research designs are appropriate for the present study.
3.10 Limitation of the study:
The study is not limited just in India, in the research the material has been taken various
international case laws, it has been individually analyzed. The data has been collected from
various sources, Westlaw, Manupatra, Jstor, ProQuest. Since in this research the
concentration is only on copyright, our study is limited to copyright statutes and Conventions
related to it.
To prove the hypothesis and to verify and validate hypothesis in accordance with the
objectives and the primary data, in the dissertation, the material that has been collected are
information and details from various other sources , that were available during 2015-16 on
those respective sources.
3.14 Definitions of terms
1. Plagiarism:- The act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or
parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and
passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.
“Plagiarism' derives from the Latin word plagiarius meaning 'kidnapper' or
'abductor'. It is the theft of someone's creativity, ideas or language, something
that strikes at the very heart of academic life. It is the form of cheating and is
generally regarded as being morally and ethically unacceptable. Plagiarism
includes reproducing someone else's work, whether it be a published article,
chapter of a book, a paper from a friend or some file, or whatever. Plagiarism
also includes the practice of employing or allowing another person to alter or
revise the work which a student submits as his/her own, whoever that other
person may be.”19
2. Copyright:- Copyright is a right given by the law to creators of literary,
dramatic, musical and artistic works and producers of cinematograph films
and sound recordings. In fact, it is a bundle of rights including, inter
alia, rights of reproduction, communication to the public, adaptation and
19
Karnataka High Court Shri P M Parameshwaramurthy vs State Of Karnataka on 21 November, 2012
Author: N.Kumar And Rao (plagiarism) https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1013176 accseed on 25 june 2016,at
4:00 pm

translation of the work. There could be slight variations in the composition of
the rights depending on the work.
3. Mash-up:- A paper that represents a mix of copied material from several
different sources without proper citation or movie or video having characters
or situations from other sources or a Web service or application that integrates
data and functionalities from various online sources
4. Fair Use:- According to section 52 copyrights act (a) fair dealing with a
literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work [not being a computer programmer]
for the purposes of- (I) private or personal use, including research; (ii)
criticism or review, whether of that work or of any other work (b) a fair
dealing with a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work for the purpose of
reporting current events- (I) in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical,
or (ii) by broadcast or in a cinematograph film or by means of photographs.
(iii) the reporting of current events, including the reporting of a lecture
delivered in public. Explanation. The storing of any work in any electronic
medium for the purposes mentioned in this clause, including the incidental
storage of any computer programmer which is not itself an infringing copy for
the said purposes, shall not constitute infringement of copyright.
5. Moral Right:- Rights that the creator of a copyrighted work has
to ownership and control of the work, as recognized by civil law and
some common law jurisdictions. Moral rights typically include the right to
the integrity of the copyrighted work, the right to publish anonymously or
under a pseudonym, and the right of attribution. Moral rights are different
from the economic rights rendered by copyrighting.
6. Public Domain:- The term “public domain” refers to creative materials that
are not protected by intellectual property laws such as copyright, trademark, or
patent laws. The public owns these works, not an individual author or artist.
Anyone can use a public domain work without obtaining permission, but no
one can ever own it. An important wrinkle to understand about public domain
material is that, while each work belongs to the public, collections of public
domain works may be protected by copyright. If, for example, someone has
collected public domain images in a book or on a website, the collection as a
whole may be protectable even though individual images are not. You are free
to copy and use individual images but copying and distributing the complete

collection may infringe what is known as the “collective works” copyright.
Collections of public domain material will be protected if the person who
created it has used creativity in the choices and organization of the public
domain material.
There are four common ways that works arrive in the public domain:
a. the copyright has expired
b. the copyright owner failed to follow copyright renewal rules
c. the copyright owner deliberately places it in the public domain,
known as “dedication,” or
d. copyright law does not protect this type of work.20
7. Parody:- a piece of writing, music, etc., that imitates the style of someone or
something else in an amusing way, or a bad or unfair example of something.21
20 http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/public-domain/welcome/ accessed on 10 july 2016,at12PM
21
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parody accessed on 1dt july 2016, 8 pm

CHAPTER 4
Analysis and Findings
4.1 Articles in the Berne Convention
According to World Intellectual Property Organization, The Berne Convention basically talks
about, protection of works and the rights given to the authors. It has three important
principles and contains a series of provisions which it is based on, “the minimum
protection to be granted, as well as special provisions available to developing countries that
want to make use of them”22.
(1) The three important principles of the convention are :
I. Work that had been created or first published in one state/country
contracting to the to the Berne Convention, will be protected throughout
the other contracting states.
II. Protection of the work does not need to be protected. That is upon
publishing the work it is automatically protected need not be registered.
III. The work which has been protected in the contracting state, shall be
protected till the time prescribed in that state, soon after it is in the public
domain till it will cease protection in the country of origin.
(2) The convention stress out on the minimum standard of the work that needs to be
protected and the duration of the protection:-
I. According to Article 2(1) of the Convention , pertaining to Work ,
“protection must include every production in the literary, scientific and
artistic domain, whatever the mode or form of its expression".23
II. Exclusive rights given to the Authors:
 Article 8 provides the right to translate, Authors of the work have
Exclusive right to delegate the translation of their work of their
22
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/summary_rome.html accessed on 25 June, 2016 at 3 30Pm
23
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/summary_rome.html accessed on 25 June, 2016 at 3 30Pm

protected work, exclusively for translation and no modification in the
work. the right to make adaptations and arrangements of the work, but
merely for the translation.
 Article 11 sets out, “Certain Rights in Dramatic and Musical
Works”24,the author of the dramatic work has exclusive right to
delegate, public performance of their work through any medium, and
secondly to communicate to the public the performance of any of the
work.
 the right to converse/show to the public the performance of such
works,
 the right to broadcast (with the possibility that a Contracting State may
provide for a mere right to equitable remuneration instead of a right of
authorization),
 Article 12, says that the Authors of literary or artistic works have the
exclusive right to authorise any variation, arrangements and other
alterations in/of their works.
 Right to used an audio-visual work, as a right to reproduce and to
communicate to the public or distribute or reproduce to the public of
that work.
 The Convention states another important Article 6 which states the
"moral rights" of the author, that is, it has given right to claim
authorship of the work and the right to take any kind of object to any
mutilation, deformation or other modification of, or other derogatory
action in relation to, which would hamper the reputation of the authors
reputation of that work.
(c)Article 7 states the term of protection, generally the work is protected for 50
years post the death of the author, cinematographic works it will be protected for 50
years post the appearance in public by consent taken by the author, if consent is not
taken 50 years after the work is released in public, in case of anonymous and
24
Supra Note 21

pseudonymous works the work is protected for 50 years after it is falls in the public
domain, and in case there is slight knowledge of the identity of the author, the 50
years after his death, For photographic works and works of applied art it shall apply
from county to country for the protecting ,but according to the convention it will be
25 years for the day it is published, Protection for Works of Joint Authorship the
protection will be for 50 years after the death of the last author alive.
(3) “The Berne Convention allows certain limitations and exceptions on economic
rights, that is, cases in which protected works may be used without the authorization of the
owner of the copyright, and without payment of compensation. These limitations are
commonly referred to as "free uses" of protected works, and are set forth in Articles 9(2)
(reproduction in certain special cases), 10 (quotations and use of works by way of illustration
for teaching purposes), 10bis (reproduction of newspaper or similar articles and use of works
for the purpose of reporting current events) and 11bis(3) (ephemeral recordings for
broadcasting purposes).”25
The Berne Union has an Assembly and an Executive Committee. Every country that
is a member of the Union and has adhered to at least the administrative and final provisions
of the Stockholm Act is a member of the Assembly. The members of the Executive
Committee are elected from among the members of the Union, except for Switzerland, which
is a member ex officio.26
4.2 Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms
and Broadcasting Organisations (1961)
The Rome Convention was introduces specially for the protection of performances of
performers, in phonograms for producers of phonograms and in broadcasts for
broadcasting organizations.
Article 3 of the convention has given all the definition to clear any ambiguity. For the
purposes of this Convention:
(a) “performers” means actors, singers, musicians, dancers, and other persons who act, sing,
deliver, declaim, play in, or otherwise perform literary or artistic works;
25
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html accessed on 25th June, 2016 at 2:45Pm.
26
http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html accessed on 25th June, 2016 at 2:45Pm.

(b) “phonogram” means any exclusively aural fixation of sounds of a performance or of
other sounds;
(c) “producer of phonograms” means the person who, or the legal entity which, first fixes the
sounds of a performance or other sounds;
(d) “publication” means the offering of copies of a phonogram to the public in reasonable
quantity;
(e) “reproduction” means the making of a copy or copies of a fixation;
(f) “broadcasting” means the transmission by wireless means for public reception of sounds
or of images and sounds;
(g) “rebroadcasting” means the simultaneous broadcasting by one broadcasting organisation
of the broadcast of another broadcasting organisation.27
The convention has given certain right to the authors, of their copyrighted work which has
been misused by the licence owner or, or has been used without the permission of the author,
this right has been given to the author for the work which has been misused and not given any
consent by the author.
(2) Article 5 and 10 of the convention states that Producers of phonograms have been given
the right to authorize or prohibit the replica of their owned phonograms. Where the
phonogram has been reproduced the conventions has given the producer to collect
remuneration against that broadcasting of that phonogram.
“(3) broadcasting rights have also been given, it simply means that there have been certain
right to produce, reproduce, and re use the work under certain guideline, it protects the work
from being broadcasted to the public at large without the permission of the author or owner.
It just protects the performers, producer, author from any illegal act and any right that is
against the conventions by the contracting parties.”28
During the incorporation of the conation the duration granted for protection would last for 20
years, but after a certain period of time it was increased to 50 years, for phonograms and
performances. Hence 2 conditions were put forth for to calculate the duration “(a) the
27 http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/treaties/text.jsp?file_id=289795 accessed on 25 june, 2016 at3 15PM
28 IBID

fixation was made, for phonograms and for performances incorporated therein; (b) the
performance took place, for performances not incorporated in phonograms; (c) the broadcast
took place WIPO is responsible, jointly with the International Labour Organization (ILO) and
the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), for the
administration of the Rome Convention.29if there is any sort of queries and information, a
intergovernmental committee is formed for any queries put forth by any contracting country.
4.3 WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) (1996)
The Treaty has come into force in 2002. The treaty has to be in compliance with the laws of
the contracting state, they were obliged to incorporate those articles in their respective states.
The treaty includes the contracting state of the Berne convention and the European Union and
any other country who wanted to join.
The WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) Document prepared by the International Bureau of
WIPO has mention that this was a agreement under the Berne convention and it indeed
needed urgent attention to protect the work in the digital environment The issues that was
addressed to this issue were conferred to as the “digital agenda”. According to WTC
“agenda” include the Furthermore, the WCT mentions two subject matters to be protected by
copyright: (I) computer programs, whatever the mode or form of their expression;
and (ii) compilations of data or other material ("databases"), in any form, which, by reason of
the selection or arrangement of their contents, constitute intellectual creations. 30
Apart from the Berne convention the WIPO copyright treaty has also given few rights “(i) the
right of distribution; (ii) the right of rental; and (iii) a broader right of communication to the
public.”31
 According to article 2 of the treaty, copyright treaty protects expressions , and
does not extend up to ideas and mathematical concepts.
 Article 6 talks about the right of distribution (1) Authors of literary and artistic
works shall enjoy the exclusive right of authorizing the making available to the
29 http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/summary_rome.html accessed on 25 June, 2016 at 3 30Pm
30 http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/summary_wct.html accessed on 25th june, 2016 at 3:00 Pm
31 http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/summary_wct.html accessed on 25th june, 2016 at 3:00 Pm

public of the original and copies of their works through sale or other transfer of
ownership. (2) Nothing in this Treaty shall affect the freedom of Contracting
Parties to determine the conditions, if any, under which the exhaustion of the right
in paragraph (1) applies after the first sale or other transfer of ownership of the
original or a copy of the work with the authorization of the author32 it simple talks
about giving rights of his work to anyone the author feels appropriate as a way of
sale or consideration, or a mere gift or ownership, thus giving full rights to new
owner to distribute the material or work as the owner likes.
 Under article 7 The right of rental
“(1) Authors of
(i) computer programs; (ii) cinematographic works; and (iii) works embodied in phonograms,
as determined in the national law of Contracting Parties, shall enjoy the exclusive right of
authorizing commercial rental to the public of the originals or copies of their works.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply
(i) in the case of computer programs, where the program itself is not the essential object of
the rental; and (ii) in the case of cinematographic works, unless such commercial rental has
led to widespread copying of such works materially impairing the exclusive right of
reproduction.
(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), a Contracting Party that, on April 15,
1994, had and continues to have in force a system of equitable remuneration of authors for
the rental of copies of their works embodied in phonograms may maintain that system
provided that the commercial rental of works embodied in phonograms is not giving rise to
the material impairment of the exclusive right of reproduction of authors.”33 they simply
provide right to the author for commercializing they work and in return collecting
remuneration from it, for example if a book is sold one has a right to in exchange of it to
receive some consideration.
 Article 8 states the right of communication which indicates that Without
prejudice to the provisions of Articles 11(1)(ii), 11bis(1)(i) and (ii), 11ter(1)(ii),
32 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2003/october/tradoc_111709.pdf 25th june 2016 at3 30 Pm
33 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2003/october/tradoc_111709.pdf accessed on 25th july at2 45 pm.

14(1)(ii) and 14bis(1) of the Berne Convention, authors of literary and artistic
works shall enjoy the exclusive right of authorizing any communication to the
public of their works, by wire or wireless means, including the making available
to the public of their works in such a way that members of the public may access
these works from a place and at a time individually chosen by them34 the WIPO
convention gladly indicates that author of their respective work have a right to
communicate to public their work, they have a right to communicate to public
through any means, even though the internet since it is has not bounders it covers
a large number of countries.
 Article 10 states Limitations and Exceptions (1) Contracting Parties may, in their
national legislation, provide for limitations of or exceptions to the rights granted
to authors of literary and artistic works under this Treaty in certain special cases
that do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not
unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. (2) Contracting
Parties shall, when applying the Berne Convention, confine any limitations of or
exceptions to rights provided for therein to certain special cases that do not
conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice
the legitimate interests of the author35 the article states that the WIPO has to be in
compliance with the Berne Convention, expand its application to all rights. And
not with the compliance with the Berne Convention it has been the right to expand
its horizon to the digital environment
The duration for the protection of the work is 50 years, be given any kind of work.

4.4 What is plagiarism?
Shri P M Parameshwaramurthy vs State Of Karnataka on 21 November, 2012 in
the given cases Plagiarism has been defined as 'Plagiarism' derives from the Latin word
plagiaries meaning 'kidnapper' or 'abductor'. It is the theft of someone's creativity, ideas or
language, something that strikes at the very heart of academic life. It is the form of cheating
and is generally regarded as being morally and ethically unacceptable. Plagiarism includes
reproducing someone else's work, whether it be a published article, chapter of a book, a paper
from a friend or some file, or whatever. Plagiarism also includes the practice of employing or
allowing another person to alter or revise the work which a student submits as his/her own,
whoever that other person may be36.
STANFORD UNIVERSITY defined plagiarism as the “use, without giving
reasonable and appropriate credit to or acknowledging the author or source, of another
person's original work, whether such work is made up of code, formulas, ideas, language,
research, strategies, writing or other form'. YALE UNIVERSITY defines plagiarism as 'the
use of another's work, words, or ideas without attribution' which included using a source's
language without quoting, using information from a source without attribution and
paraphrasing a source in a form that stays too close to the original.”37
Plagiarism in simple words means, copying someone else’s work and passing it off as
one owns. It is not difficult to understand what is plagiarism, Turnitin.com a very effective
website as a source of verifying plagiarism has described different Types of Plagiarism:
1) Clone:- cloning has been described as word to word copying of the paragraph or
articles and passing it off as one self. Cloning is mostly used by majority of the
students since they don’t know what is plagiarism and the meaning, cloning is
copying word to word and passing it off as one owns work. Copying a extract
exactly the same way it is written. Clone plagiarism is also called as the verbatim
plagiarism.
2) Ctrl + C:- ctrl and c is the most popular type of plagiarism used by most of the
students and artistic person, they copy a significant part of the paragraph, they can
36
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/101702059/ accessed on 25th
june,2016 at 4:00 PM
37
IBID

just directly copy the main paragraph of the write-up and not give any kind of
attribution to the original writer .
3) Find – replace: find and replace is another kind of plagiarism where only few key
words are changed and the essence of the paragraph has been kept the same,
where only few words are changed or synonyms are used and rest of the body has
been kept the same. Find and replace only replaces few words retains the original
meaning of the paragraph.
4) Remix plagiarism :- remix plagiarism is rephrase the original work into new work
keeping the original work intact, it might be keeping the rest of the work same and
just rephrasing the sentence , as we know as the remix culture today , keeps the
original tune or words the same , just modifying the tune. Remix plagiarism was
used very much widely in today’s world, copying and using someone else’s work.
5) Recycle:- is using someone else work as much as possible, leaving a few parts
here and there, or you can say adding some words of your own but generously
copying someone else work without acknowledging it.
6) Hybrid :- hybrid is a sort of a plagiarism, which has partially citied work and
partially copied work, only a certain part of the copied work is cited and certain
part is not, in this way one can fool the professors or the checks that have
mistakenly not cited the other part.
7) Aggregator:- plagiarism as a aggregator simply means the entire work is cited
properly but there is no original work of its own mentioned in the entire paper, we
can say only or around 10% of the written paper can be their original work and the
rest 90% would amount to copied work thoroughly cited.
8) Mash-up: Mash-up is coming up in the copyright laws, as mash-up means
composition or blend of 2 or more composition or videos, combining write ups of
2 or more places or books and making it one, two different songs and making it
into one.
The above types of plagiarism are used online and offline with the increase in technology,
and new open sources and closed sources of information available by all colleges and firms.

4.5 Video Mash-up
We will now focus on video mash-up. What actually constitutes to video mash-up, video
mash-up is basically a combination of two or more videos put together making it one video
by using various existing software already available.
Video mash-up dose not only include mixing of different videos and making it one, but it
always includes recording one owns track and mixing it with someone’s else’s tune, it is a
mash up of videos and music which is widely used by software and music developers, music
can be even a single tune or a loop or a beat that has been copied from other music of video.
During the 2007, Jordan Roseman well known artist knows as DJ Earworm, started with
music and Video mash-ups, he used various videos and music songs and seeming less mixed
the videos together and ultimately turned them into a new video. DJ “who create their songs
on the spot by sampling and remixing the work of others. They sample snippets of everything
from Bach to punk, weaving them into a sound palette held together by beats or loops or by
rhythms contained in the remixed material. DJ Shadow speaks passionately about “crate-
digging,” searching among thousands of old vinyl albums for breaks, beats, and sounds in the
same way that an archaeologist might spend hours searching for ancient artefacts.”38.
Practices of sampling and remixing are now omnipresent in the piece of music which are
really know to all in the market, it shows that in performance on which the song-maker
strives to exercise good Multi tracking, sampling, and mash-up are performance that suggest
that songs are written all the time more at the connection of various discourses and multiple
traditions. DJ and remix artist multi-track songs as per their need and make a mash-up to
make is a new song all by itself, it is a mixture of different songs , with different beats and
fast a slow but the music resembles to the original song either by some tone, or music notes,
and when we talk about Video mash-up it deals with the video and resemblance in the other
videos that are picked up to be made one video.
Trailer mash-up in simple terms means incorporating various small clips of few seconds of
video of various movies or serials and making it into a whole new video, having no
38
McClure, John S.. Mashup Religion : Pop Music and Theological Invention.Waco, TX, USA: Baylor
University Press, 2011. ProQuest ebrary. Accessed on Web. 28 June 2016 at 4:45 PM.

connection with the original videos, trailer mash-up basically revolves around the movie or
video taken and how the plot of the video can change, this can be done as there are many
online software available, many artists can use these software and use the material according
to their own convenience.
According to oxford dictionary super cuts videos is defined as “A compilation of a large
number of short video clips, typically showing examples of a repeated or clichéd action or
phrase in films or broadcasts”39
The term supercut was first created by Andy Baio. Also known as super cut video mash-ups,
they focus on the phrases and devices that are repeated in movies and TV and repeat them in
a comic effect. The video content adds context to these clichés, and presents them in a new
light, or inspire a moratorium on them. The super cut was initial introduced in the year after
YouTube was introduced. Supercut.org is a website which creates super cuts automatically of
existing video on that has been created on that site previously by other people.“(A) genre of
video meme, where some obsessive-compulsive superman collects every phrase/action/cliché
from an episode (or entire series) of their favourite show/film/game into a single massive
video montage.”40 Super cut is a new genre of video mash-up, where the entire video or parts
of the video had been converted in a meme phrased and clichés of an episode.
The YouTube “Rewind” video, YouTube every year release its collection of a mash up of
videos of the highly ranked and most viewed videos of that year. It’s a odd mix of everything
that has been viewed the most and has been gone from that year. YouTube rewind has just
been a mix of videos, which reminds people what they have forgotten and what they have
missed throughout the year, YouTube has made a effort to bring things together in a short
mash-up of by these videos, the most viewed videos are put together for the updating the
viewers what they have missed and what they can still watch. In mash up one can identify
what they are watching and what are the two different songs or more or the different videos
they are viewing although it would amount to a new creation at time but it will be a mash-up.
4.6 How does one identify plagiarism ?
There are various tools that can detect of identify that plagiarism has been conducted. It is
really hard to define as to what is plagiarism and what is not. it has not always been possible
39
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/supercut accessed on Wednesday 28th June 2016 at
06:45 PM
40
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/andy-baio last accessed on 28th June 2016, at 6 50 PM.

to invent a new idea every now and then we are just adding upon our knowledge that we have
absorbed by our ancestors and various conferences etc going on around us.
Therefore to avoid plagiarism it is feasible to denote the paragraph or idea has been attributed
or the work has been understood according to the individuals understating and has been
written. With the growing technology and increase in the number of software, now we can
detect plagiarism with the number software as mentioned below.
Online resource for checking plagiarism
1. Paper Rater
It is a very famous website that helps students and professors or institutions to check for
plagiarism for free. It helps the graduate student and professors to source their work, Paper-
Rater is a free plagiarism checker which helps institutes to know where and at what point
plagiarism has occurred. Since it is free it has made it easily accessible for the student to keep
a check on their work and institutes for the thesis or dissertations they will be accepting,
2. WriteCheck Powered by Turn-It-ln
Yet one of the most efficient and the most used detector for plagiarism is the Turn tin The
efficacy of turn tin is the most in a plagiarism detector, as this tool is party upon its database.
Turn tin has a really huge database it is huge and as a result to this the results or the outcome
are really brilliant. As per the statistics is has nearly over nine billion live web pages. This
tool has been widely used by various universities and college worldwide for plagiarism
detection.
3. Plagiarism Checker
Plagiarism checker is a tool which is used to check plagiarism and one has to pay a minimum
of 5$ to check the assignment to sign up with the site. It gives a full check with the sources
from where it has been sited including the site from where the copied matter has me derived
has both free and paid memberships.
4. Dupli Checker
Is a online database tool used for checking plagiarism and it is completely free, one can copy-
paste the text, entering the URL of the content that is required to be checked, or even

uploading a file, it is totally free and very simple to use. One person who has signed-up to the
sight can check up to 50 plagiarism checks per day.
5. CopyLeaks
Copy leaks is a online based website in which fights against plagiarism and infringement on
online based content, when someone steals someone’s else’s work without their knowledge,
copy leaks one has to upload the content and put it up for a check and then once they detect
the plagiarism, a notification automatically goes to the owner about the plagiarism.
Software for Detecting Plagiarism
The above are some of the online based tool. Mentioned are some of the offline soft ware’s
that are used to detect plagiarism.
1. EVE 2
A simple essay verification engine software (http://www.canexus.com/eve/) which is used to
detect plagiarism in most of the ways.
2. Viper
Viper is a free soft ware which is used to detect plagiarism online, as compared to uploading
your file online and then running the check, viper is a offline software which can be
downloaded on your computer and hence used.
3. JPlag
JPlag is a system that finds similarities among multiple sets of source code files. This way it
can detect software plagiarism. JPlag is basically brings out the similarity of the copyrighted
software which has been plagiarised the software has a certain programme through which
they will know any sort of copying.
One can download any one of the software mentioned and install them. Schools and
institutions can use the software and online tools obtainable to detect plagiarism.

4.7 Fair Use
The very important rule to copyright infringement is Fair Use, under this principal the law
has given permission to use portions of copyrighted material for the purpose of criticism,
educational purpose, research, and to comment on the work, without deriving permission
from the copyright owner. Fiar use includes quoting experts from a book in a review,
scholarly articles, or term paper, copying and distributing a newspaper article to illustrate an
education lesson, and using portions of a work in parody of that work, such as a spoof version
of a song. The supreme court of united states also considered fair use to use videocassette
recorder to make copies of television programs and movies for later viewing.41
Laws relating to fair dealing/fair use has been included in section 52 of the Indian copyright
act 1956, as fair use has already been defined in chapter 3, A fair dealing of any work except
for of any computer programmes is allowed in India for the principle of -
1. Personal use, including research, educational research,
2. criticism or review, parody,
3. reporting of present events and current affairs,
4. Including the reporting of a lecture delivered in public.
According to fair use, the less one uses the more likely it will constitute to fair use. But
however, even if one takes a small portion of the work and it constitutes to be the heart of the
work then it would not fall under Fair use and would amount to plagiarism. In other words, it
would lead to problems if one takes the most significant part of the work, it would amount to
infringement of that work.
There is no simple test to determine what amounts to fair use, but there are four factors the
judges consider are while determining fair use:
 the purpose and character of your use
 the nature of the copyrighted work
 the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
41
Copyright protection and information technology,chapter II page no 41, paragraph 1 line 6, by Dr Fareed
ahmed Rafiqi.

 the effect of the use upon the potential market.42
Some people mistakenly believe it’s permissible to use a work (or portion of it) if an
acknowledgment is provided. For example, they believe it’s okay to use a photograph in a
magazine as long as the name of the photographer is included. This is not true.
Acknowledgment of the source material (such as citing the photographer) may be a
consideration in a fair use determination, but it will not protect against a claim of
infringement. In some cases, such as advertisements, acknowledgments can backfire and
create additional legal claims, such as a violation of the right of publicity. When in doubt as
to the right to use or acknowledge a source, the most prudent course may be to seek the
permission of the copyright owner.43
Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma 1996(16) PTC 670 44Kerala high court, in the following
case both the plaintiff and defendant has followed the same theme in their play, it was held
that simply replicating the play did not amount to infringement or plagiarism because it was
simply produced to criticize the original play and did not amount to steal any monitory
benefits of the present play, therefore it was zeroed down to the that there was not likelihood
of any competition between the two dramas.
Blackwood And Sons Ltd. And Ors. vs A.N. Parasuraman And Ors. on 28
February, 1958 yet another case he court held that while determining the character of parody
it is very important to figure out whether the use so done wishes to compete with the original
work of the creator.45 Firstly Parody must not aim to compete with the copyright holder
secondly the work should not be improperly used.
HUBBARD v VOSPER [1972]1 All ER 1023 (CA) [UK]
It is impossible to define what is fair dealing or fair use. It has always been on the discretion
on the degree. You must consider first the number and extent of the quotations and extracts.
Are they altogether too many and too long to be fair? Then you must consider the use made
of them. If they are used as a basis for comment, criticism or review, that may be a fair
dealing. If they are used to convey the same information as the author, for a rival purpose,
that may be unfair. Next, you must consider the proportions. To take long extracts and attach
42
ibdi
43
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/. seen on 1st
july 2016, at 7:45 PM.
44 http://www.pulp.up.ac.za/pdf/2011_02/2011_02_m_chapter9.pdf accessed on 1 july 2016,at7:45 Pm
45
http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/374780/Trademark/Legality+of+Parodies+Much+Ado+about+Nothing .1
july 2016, 7 45 pm

short comments may be unfair. But, short extracts and long comments may be fair. Other
considerations may come to mind also. But, after all is said and done, it must be a matter of
impression. As with fair comment in the law of libel, so with fair dealing in the law of
copyright. The tribunal of fact must decide.46
4.8 Moral Right & plagiarism
According to the copyright law, moral right is under section 57 of the Act, is as
follows:-
Section 57 in the Copyright Act, 1957
Author’s special right.—
(1) Independently of the author’s copyright and even after the assignment either
wholly or partially of the said copyright, the author of a work shall have the right——1[(1)
Independently of the author’s copyright and even after the assignment either wholly or
partially of the said copyright, the author of a work shall have the right—"
(a) to claim authorship of the work; and
(b) to restrain or claim damages in respect of any distortion, mutilation,
modification or other act in relation to the said work which is done before the
expiration of the term of copyright if such distortion, mutilation, modification or other
act would be prejudicial to his honour or reputation: Provided that the author shall not
have any right to restrain of claim damages in respect of any adaptation of a computer
programme to which clause (aa) of sub-section (1) of section 52 applies.
Explanation.—Failure to display a work or to display it to the satisfaction of the
author shall not be deemed to be an infringement of the rights conferred by this
section.]
(2) The right conferred upon an author of a work by sub-section (1), other than the
right to claim authorship of the work, may be exercised by the legal representatives of the
author.47
According to the Berne convention:
46
http://www.wipo.int/tools/en/gsearch.html?cx=016458537594905406506%3Ahmturfwvzzq&cof=FORID%3A
11&q=introduction seen on 1 july 2016,7:45 pm
47
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1710491/ accessed on 1st
july 2016,8:00 pm

In the Berne convention related to moral rights: The Berne Convention has mentioned to the
Member States the moral rights of the author’s as the following :
Firstly we need to keep in find the license of the work can be with the copyright holder but
the moral right as the author can be in the hand of the author, separately to the author's
economic rights, the author has the right to maintain authorship of his or her work and to
object is any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in
relation to, the said work, which would be affect the honour or reputation of the author.
The nature of moral rights: Moral rights basically are the right to make the work public, the
right of recognition as author, and the right of preserving the integrity of the work. How these
rights are circumscribed are matters for local legislation and judicial interpretation. They may
survive the death of the author. 48
AMAR NATH SEHGAL v UNION OF INDIA 2005 (30) PTC 2S3 [India]49
In the material world, laws are geared to protect the right to equitable fee. Moral rights is
considered to be the essence of his works. The author is not the owner of the copyrighted
work but has a right to preserve, protect and nurture his creations through his moral rights.
When an author creates a work of art or a literary work, it is possible to conceive of
many rights which may flow. The first and foremost right which comes to one's mind
is the 'paternity right' in the work, i.e. the right to have his name on the work. It may
also be called the 'identification right' or 'attribution right'. The second right which one
thinks of is the right to disseminate his work i.e. the "divulgation or dissemination
right". It would embrace the economic right to sell the work for valuable
consideration. Linked to the paternity right, a third right, being the right to maintain
purity in the work can be thought of. There can be no purity without integrity. It may
be a matter of opinion, but certainly, treatment of a work which is derogatory to the
reputation of the author, or in some way degrades the work as conceived by the author
can be objected to by the author. This would be the moral right of "integrity". 50
authors also have a right to withdraw the work, if they feel that by time the work will
not be not be helpful to anyone any more then they can retract the article or work
according to their convenience.
48
Supra note 14
49 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1990275/ accessed on 1 july 2016,at 7 45 Pm
50
ibid

“In Smt. Mannu Bhandari, Appellant v. Kala Vikas Pictures Pvt. Ltd. and another, AIR
1987 Delhi 13”51,
“The court observed that section 57 lifts the author’s status beyond the material gains of
copyright and gives it a special status”.52 Author has a right to restrain distortion, mutation,
modification or other act is prejudicial to his honour or reputation of his work is not just
limited to cases of literary reproduction of his work nut also audio visual work and a restrain
or injunction can be bough forth in both the matters.
“The language of section 57 is of the widest amplitude and cannot be restricted to
‘literary’ expression only. Visual and audio manifestations are The court observed that by
reading the contract with section 57, it is obvious that modifications, which are permissible,
are such modifications, which do not convert the film into an entirely new version from the
original novel. The modifications should also not distort or mutilate the original novel.”53
Since Mannu Bhandari was the author of the story his names will be shown in the credits of
the film entirely. This is laid down that the author is given due recognition of his work. The
court therefore, directed certain modifications and certain parts of the movie had to be deleted
before the screening of it.
4.9 Copyright Infringement:
Section 51 of Copyright Act states as under what would amount to copyright infringement.
Copyright in a work shall be deemed to be infringed—
(a) “when any person, without a licence granted by the owner of the copyright or the
Registrar of Copyrights under this Act or in contravention of the conditions of a licence so
granted or of any condition imposed by a competent authority under this Act—
(i) does anything, the exclusive right to do which is by this Act conferred upon the
owner of the copyright, or
(ii) permits for profit any place to be used for the communication of the work to the
public where such communication constitutes an infringement of the copyright in the
51 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/331111/ accessed on 1 july 2016,at 7 45 Pm
52
http://www.majmudarindia.com/pdf/Moral%20rights%20of%20an%20author.pdf accessed on 1july 8 20Pm
53
Supra Note 18

work, unless he was not aware and had no reasonable ground for believing that such
communication to the public would be an infringement of copyright; or]
(ii) permits for profit any place to be used for the communication of the work to the
public where such communication constitutes an infringement of the copyright in the
work, unless he was not aware and had no reasonable ground for believing that such
communication to the public would be an infringement of copyright; or]"
“(b) when any person—
(i) makes for sale or hire, or sells or lets for hire, or by way of trade displays or
offers for sale or hire, or
(ii) distributes either for the purpose of trade or to such an extent as to affect
prejudicially the owner of the copyright, or
(iii) by way of trade exhibits in public, or
(iv) Imports 2[***] into India, 2[***] into India," any infringing copies of the
work: 3[Provided that nothing in sub-clause (iv) shall apply to the import of
one copy of any work, for the private and domestic use of the importer.]
Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, the reproduction of a literary,
dramatic, musical or artistic work in the form of a cinematograph film shall be
deemed to be an “infringing copy”.54
“R.G Anand vs M/S. Delux Films & Ors on 18 August, 1978 Equivalent citations: 1978
AIR 1613, 1979 SCR (1) 218”55
IT the only Supreme Court decision that seems to have given some credibility to idea-
expression dichotomy. That case dealt with the alleged infringement of the script of a play,
arising from the adaption of the same into a cinematograph film. The main theme of the play
was provincialism, where the plot involved persons belonging to different provinces (Punjab
and Tamil Nadu). The film retained the same theme, simply reversing the gender of the
person originating of the above provinces.
54
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1038145/ accessed on 1 july, 2016 at 8:00Pm
55 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1734007/ accessed on 1 july,2016 at 8:00Pm

“The Court first compared the play and the movie from a broad perspective and
opined that the film’s theme was broader in scope, covering both provincialism and dowry. In
concluding that infringement was no established, the Court held that copyright cannot be
acquired over an idea and factually held that the dissimilarities between the two works was
substantial enough for one to conclude that there was no colourable imitation of his play’s
script. Being a Supreme Court decision, the principles established in this case form part of the
law of the land and holds good even today.”56
One of the surest tests is to determine whether or not there has been a violation of
copyright is to see if the reader, viewer or the onlooker after having read or seen both the
works is clearly of the opinion and gets an clearly identifiable notion that the following work
emerge to be a copy of the original.
56
http://www.lakshmisri.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/WHITE_PAPER_IP_article_idea_expression_di
chotomy_esheeta-REVISED.pdf accessed on 1st july 2016. 8 10 pm

CHAPTER 5
Conclusion and Suggestion
5.1 The Thin Line Of Difference Between What Will Amount To Plagiarization And
What Will Amount To Infringement.
“Plagiarism literally means passing off third persons work as one’s own, as seen earlier in
the Shri P M Parameshwara murthy vs State Of Karnataka on 21 November, 2012”57 in the
given cases plagiarism has been given the meaning that it is copying of someone's work,
ideas or language, something that strikes or which is the main portion on that articles of thesis
or write-up. It is the form of cheating which is not morally or generally acceptable in any
form what so ever. Plagiarism includes any articles, book, article, poem anything that is
published.
As seen in chapter 4 we have laid down the distinction between the types of plagiarism, so it
will not be hard to find out what amounts to plagiarism, as plagiarism and copyright
infringement both the concepts overlap each other , but there is a wide distinction between
the two concepts. For example an “idea” which is not covered under the copyright Law
definition, but it is covered under plagiarism, idea can be plagiarised but it cannot constitute
to copyright infringement. Under the United States of America, Copyright Law even ideas
are protected and they can be registered under the copyright law. Under the United Kingdom
copyright law, ideas are not protected.
The following are deemed to be “Plagiarism according to turnitin.com, as we know majority
of the plagiarism checks are run from various colleges, on turnitin.com.
1. turning in someone else’s work as your own,
2. copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
3. failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
4. giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
5. changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving
credit
57 Supra note 31

6. copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority
of your work, whether you give credit or not (see our section on “fair use”
rules)”58
The Copyright Act, 1957 according to the copyright office, copyright protects original
literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works and cinematograph films and sound recordings
from unauthorized uses. According to patents laws, copyright protects the expressions and
not the ideas, it even fails to protect ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical
concepts as such.
Plagiarism has not been defined in the act, but it has been defined by various colleges and
dictionary mentioning plagiarism means copying someone else’s work or idea, or the heart of
the thesis, or the write up, and passing it off as one’s own.
Copyright infringement and plagiarism has always been a controversy, students and readers
usually believe that that both of them are synonym to each other, to take a deeper look at it
Copyright is codified under the statute of India. One of the most important things to keep in
mind about Copyright Law is that 1) it governed under the codified law of India and 2)
accusation of an illegal act, the illegality is basically infringement of protected works without
exception, license, that are made within the Copyright Law. On the other hand Plagiarism, is
the act to rob and pass off someone else's ideas or words as one's own without attributing the
original source. Brief or attributed quotes or paragraphs generally do not constitute
plagiarism. Plagiarism is not governed or defined under the law, so no one can be actually
sued for plagiarism. Plagiarism is about idea theft a person tries steal an idea and claim it as
his or her own.
Copyright infringement occurs if the work is registered or well-known, or if the work is in
public domain, on the other hand plagiarism can occurs even when the work is in public
domain, that is once the work has crossed the copyright license term it enters the public
domain and in-spite of that, the source has to be acknowledged, if the source is not
acknowledged it would still amount to plagiarism.
58 http://www.plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/what-is-plagiarism/ accessed on 13th July 2016,at 4 45Pm.

5.2 Fair Use and Copyright Infringement
In the Napster case, which sought to clarify the rights of musicians to control the
distribution of their music through the Internet, has raised awareness of the issue of copyright
and the Internet. The risk of plagiarism and copyright infringement of Internet information is
high because electronic data is easily reproduced. Also, the vast quantities of data available
make it difficult to trace the original source. Pharmacists should be aware of how copyright
issues affect their use of the Internet as an information resource in their practice.
As copyright law explains, an idea cannot be copyrighted but the expression can be
copyrighted. Most of the WebPages on the internet are copyrighted law, it together with text,
video, photos, and downloadable programs. In fact, even the content of e-mail messages and
postings to bulletin boards or conferences are eligible for copyright protection. An original
work does not have to be registered, nor bear a copyright statement or mark to be protected.
Copyright laws in Canada protect information produced in other countries when it is used in
Canada. Be aware that making a copy of information from the Internet for someone else may
constitute copyright infringement. Avoid the risk of copyright infringement by referring
others to the source and giving them the URL and website name whenever possible. You
could also summarize information from your Internet searches and communicate it verbally.
“K ELLY V . A RRIBA 1 Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. S OFT C ORP .: T HUMBNAIL I
MAGES” is a “significant Internet copyright case arising from the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals. There, the court addressed the interface between the public ‘s fair use rights and two
of a copyright holder‘s exclusive rights — those of reproduction and public display. Factual
and Procedural Background In Kelly , the defendant Arriba operated a ―visual search engine
‖ that allowed users to search for and retrieve images from the Internet. To provide this
functionality, Arriba developed a computer program that would ―crawl‖ the Internet
searching for images to index. It would then download fullsized copies of those images onto
Arriba‘s server and generate lower resolution thumbnails. Once the thumbnails were created,
the program deleted the fullsized originals from the server. Arriba altered its display format
several times. In response to a search query, the search engine produced a ―Results‖ page,
which listed of a number of reduced, ―thumbnail‖ images . When a user would double-click
these images, a full-sized version of the image would appear. From January 1999 to June
1999, the fullsized -line linking , a process that retrieved the full-sized image from the
original website and displayed it on the Arriba Web page. From July 1999 until sometime
after August 2000, the results page contained thumbnails accompanied by a ―Source‖ link

and a ―Details‖ link. The ―Details link produced a separate screen containing the thumbnail
image and a link to the originating images were produced by ―in site. Clicking the
―Source‖ link would produce two new windows on top of the Arriba page. The window in
the forefront contained the full-sized image, imported directly from the originating website.
Underneath that was another window displaying the originating Web page. This technique is
known as framing, where an image from a second website is viewed within a frame that is
pulled into the primary site‘s Web page. Currently, when a user clicks on the thumbnail, the
user is sent to the originating site via an ―out line link (a link that directs the user from the
linking-site to the linked-to site). 2 Arriba‘s crawler copied 35 of Kelly‘s copyrighted
photographs into the Arriba database. Kelly sued Arriba for copyright infringement ,
complaining of Arriba‘s thumbnails , as well as its in-line and framing links. The district
court ruled that Arriba‘s use of both the thumbnails and the full-sized images was a fair use. 3
Kelly appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals”.59
59 Copyright Law and a Brief Look at the Google Library Project. New York, US: Nova, 2010. ProQuest ebrary.
Web. 13 July 2016.

5.3 Plagiarism in music composition
Plagiarism today, as it continues to be devoted by both in academics and song-
writers, is getting worse in PNG more in music composition. Showered by the demand for
western-based music and music composition, un-trained and trained singers or musicians and
song-writers are aimlessly copying and reproducing the music arrangements and lyrics from
the well known singers and compositions or tunes of western music. this is plagiarism at its
best today, as we know plagiarism is a moral wrong it does not constitute to infringement
until and unless it falls under the section if infringement.
Lucky though, for many of such people, the absence of publishing houses and piracy
watch-dogs in PNG has made it impossible to catch anybody. The pride and joy of composers
is to sit back and listen to the result of their original composition on audio CD that is free
of plagiarism. Plagiarism is a sickness and a make-believe dream that colours a musicians life
with guilt for the rest of his life! Writing music should originate from our own hearts. It
portrays our inner expressions and feeling about life, love, poverty, politics, family and God.
Writing our own songs not only teaches us about ourselves but also powerfully transfers
messages about the subject of those songs to others.60
There have been times when we have heard differ types of song they sound and look
very similar to other songs, sometimes we tend to ignore the fact that they have been
plagiarised, and sometimes when recognised it will amount to legal infringement,
Robin Thicke's 2013 hit album "Blurred Lines" was relapsed, the music industry
found out that there WERE similarities to a Marvin Gaye's 1977 hit album "Got to Give It
Up." For more than a year and a half, there was a ongoing lawsuit against Thicke and
Pharrell Williams, who share at that time were song writing credit for the song,
for plagiarism of the Gaye song. Infact in the federal court of Los Angeles the jury agreed
that "Blurred Lines" was indeed copied from Marvin Gaye song without taking any type of
permission. The jury found that Thicke and Williams had committed copyright
infringement and and ended up paying $7.3 million to Gaye's family.
60
Brown, M. (2015,Mar 17). Is imitation the greatest form of flattery? A look at music plagiarismand
copyright infringement. University Wire Retrieved from
http://ezproxy.svkm.ac.in:2076/docview/1664307323?accountid=32277

Now, this has not been one of the first case in music plagiarism we've seen, there have
been numerous other events that have followed and come into the limelight. In 1989, January
there had been a similar case of plagiarism in which Tom Petty's 1989 song "I Won't Back
Down" and Sam Smith's "Stay With Me" were found to be plagiarised, In this case Smith had
agreed to give co-writing credit on the song to Petty and Jeff Lynne.
Some cases on music infringement:
As we know the famous song "Bitter Sweet Symphony" by the Verve, during that
time anytime it had been played on the radio or TV, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards were
getting royalties for that song. The backing strings from "Bitter Sweet Symphony" was
borrowed from an orchestral performance of the Rolling Stones' "The Last Time." The Verve
originally asked permission to use the sampling but ended up taking more than they originally
asked for, so the band ended up losing all of their royalties.61
The Beatles versus Chuck Berry It's true. The Beatles' 1969 song "Come Together"
sounded musically similar to Chuck Berry's 1956 song "You Can't Catch Me." The lyrics
from "Come Together" also referred to "old flat top, grooving' up slowly," which was a
character Berry referenced in his song. Morris Levy, the owner of Big Seven Music
Corporation and the publisher of the Berry song, sued Lennon in 1973 for plagiarism. The
case was settled with the agreement that Lennon was to record covers of three Big Seven
Corp. songs. When Lennon refused to release the last song, he was sued again for breach of
contract. Lennon then countersued after Levy released an album of Lennon's recordings
without his consent and was awarded nearly $85,000. Lesson learned: Don't mess with a
Beatle.62
What brings us here is why has none of the artist taken any action for all this ?
Tom Petty's "American Girl" and The Strokes' "Last Nite"
Madonna's "Express Yourself" and Lady Gaga's "Born This Way"
Tom Petty's "Mary Jane's Last Dance" and Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Dani California"
61
Supra note 39
62IBID

Bon Jovi's "Livin' On A Prayer" and Belinda Carlisle's "Heaven Is A Place On
Earth"63 all these case of plagiarism. Copying music and stealing it in their name, how fair is
it to the author or even more to the viewers? Ultimately they will looses their trust in the
signers or music composures.
5.4 Would video mash-up amount to plagiarism or copyright infringement
According to the law mash up videos would amount to copyright infringement, as mash up
vies are derived work or various other sources it has to be understood and analysed by the
judges if the mash up would amount to plagiarism. As plagiarism is a moral right that has
been violated it does not amount to any legal violation, but if the judge feels that alleged
infringer has used any substantial part of the video or audio it would amount to infringement.
Since it would be a moral or ethical wrong i9t will not be covered under the copyright law
and once can sue the person from restricted used of that video, it would amount to injunction.
It could even fall under fair use , that is the derived work is not harming the original work
then it would not amount to infringement as such. Although they have not taken permission
from the rightful owner it will still not amount to infringement such the person is not using it
for monitory gained, if the music video is used for monitory gains then it would amount to
infringement as there would be similarity and the public would make out the difference
between the two original work and the remixed or mash up.
Under copyright act USA and UK says that video mash up will totally depend upon fair use
of the video mash up, derived work would also be one of the reason it identify plagiarism in a
video. As we know mishap is cut and paste of parts of videos with a different dubbing and
different music, although the artist has not taken any much effort to derive the work as it
already exists in the market he just has to pick it up and paste it to a certain extend. Mash up
makes it difficult to copyright material if it he is not teen prior permissiong from the
copyright holder.
Using less than a “substantial part“ If you’re not using a “substantial part” of the source
material, then you don’t need permission. The law does not specify how much a “substantial
part” is; rather, it comes down to whether an important, distinctive, or essential part of the
63
Brown, M. (2015,Mar 17). Is imitation the greatest form of flattery? A look at music plagiarismand
copyright infringement. University Wire Retrieved from

source material is being used. There are no guidelines on how much can be used – the test is a
qualitative test rather than a quantitative one. You may have heard that it’s okay to use 5% or
10% of something without permission, but this is not the case. As a result, it may be tricky to
work out whether you are using a substantial part. In practical terms, if you can recognise the
source material in the new work, then you are probably using a substantial part. On the other
hand, if you chop up audio and video into very small or almost indiscernible or unidentifiable
pieces and remix or mash up these, then you may not be using a substantial part. In one
famous copyright case, a few bars of one song used in another was found to be a substantial
part.64
CASES OF Mash up VIDEO PLAGIARISM
As we knee remix and mash up videos are really distinct to each other but still people get
confused between the two terms. Remix is just including a few more works and changing a
bit of the sound track but it keeps thru original content same. Video mash up takes bits and
pieces and chances the entire voided on its own, people will not recognise the new video , but
it is still plagiarised because it copied. Video mash up plagiarism is a very new and a ver.
fresh topic, hence there are not many cases on it.
Key points to keep in mind
“• You are likely to need permission to use copyright-protected material created by others if
an exception doesn’t apply.
• You don’t need permission to use copyright-protected material created by others if you can
rely on a “fair dealing“ exception.”65
• You don’t need permission to use material created by others if copyright has expired
 Anu malik is a well know music composer of our industry, he has been
blamed of lifting various songs from various forge music alums his most
famous song the most famous case of his lifting was 'Kaho Na Kaho' from
Murder (2004),not only was the music copies so was the lyrics and the video
in the background has a lot of similarities, was a direct blatant copying from
64 file:///D:/Sayali/Downloads/Mashups%20Memes%20Remixes%20and%20Copyright.pdf accessed on 9th july
2016,at 10:00 Pm
65 file:///D:/Sayali/Downloads/Mashups%20Memes%20Remixes%20and%20Copyright.pdf accessed on 9th july
2016,at 10:00 Pm

'Tamally Maak' of Amr Diab and 'Raja Ko Rani Se' from Akele Hum Akele
Tum (1995), a copy of the 'The Love Theme' from The Godfather. Although
anu malik has been accused many times of plagiarism but as plagiarism is a
serious offense on the reputation of a artist he has always denied it.
 Coldplay front man Chris Martin has admitted to plagiarizing many, if not
most, of the songs he wrote. Specifically, Chris said:“WE’RE DEFINITELY
GOOD, BUT I DON’T THINK YOU CAN SAY WE’RE THAT
ORIGINAL,” HE NOTES. “I REGARD US AS BEING INCREDIBLY
GOOD PLAGIARISTS.”In another article, the song “Fix You” was
specifically mentioned as being a copy ofElbow’s “Grace Under Pressure”. To
that, guitarist Jonny Buckland had this to say.“WE’VE NEVER SO
DIRECTLY STOLEN OFF ANYONE BEFORE. WE’VE NEVER PAID
FOR OUR PLAGIARISM.”66 it was clears case of sealing someone’s else’s
work and using it as it own it would have not been fair on the part of the
original author. Although case has been taken legally or not, the trust over
cold pay is a little shaken by this act.
 The movie Barfi was accused of plagiarism of different videos from foreign
countries files, Anurag Basu has claimed even since he was a child he could
not think originally. We need to keep in mind that few scenes of the movie
were copied from other foreign movies and hence with the vivacity in the
scenes one could not make out the plagiarism, Hindustan times67 has given us
10 scenes which were copied blatantly from 10 different movies, although
some movies were in the public domain but it creator or author has to be given
attribution, although anurab basu denied the accusation but Hindustime Times
has show all the videos and their clips.
66 https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2005/07/04/coldplay-admits-plagiarism/ accessed on 10 july,2016 at
10:00 PM
67http://www.hindustantimes.com/bollywood/top-10-barfi-scenes-that-are-copied/story-
amYxopei4xXHxJHUTgKBJM.html accessed on 10th july 2016,at 10:00 PM.

 The most famous cause of plagiarism today is Hritic roshans mohenjodaro,
Ashutosh Gowariker has been accused of stealing the script of Akashaditya
Lama. Lama had written the movie somewhere around 1995 and had
copyrighted the scripts hence and when ashutosh and lama were working on a
movie together he narrated THE SCRIPT TO HIM, BUT ASHUTOSH
DENIED refused to take the script, somewhere around 2010 ashutosh
copyrights the script again, now lama has files a case against him in the court.
The cases was heard on 12th July in front of justice G S Patel and next date is
20th July 2016, where further papers have to be field.
5.5 Landmark judgments/ scandals of plagiarization (foreign and India)
 Professor Chintamani Nagesa Ramachandra Rao is the third scientist to be
awarded the highest civilian award -- Bharat Ratna, a crowning glory of his
inexorable list of outstanding achievements.68 A Public interest litigation was
filed against C N Rae for the bearcat ratna, by two students who were studying
Law , the case was dismissed saying that it is impossible to submit 1400
research papers in one go, and out of which only one research paper was
plagiarised, as C N R Rao was the co author of the research papers keeping a
close eye on all of them would be impossible, although upon the knowledge of
C N R RAo of the plagiarism he had given his apology. As bahrat Ratna is a
very high and prestigious award given to citizens, therefore retracting the
award would not be a solution for plagiarism.
 Robin Thicke's 2013 hit album "Blurred Lines" was relapsed, the music
industry found out that there WERE similarities to a Marvin Gaye's 1977 hit
album "Got to Give It Up." For more than a year and a half, there was a
ongoing lawsuit against Thicke and Pharrell Williams, who share at that time
were song writing credit for the song, for plagiarism of the Gaye song. In fact
in the federal court of Los Angeles the jury agreed that "Blurred Lines" was
indeed copied from Marvin Gaye song without taking any type of permission.
68
http://www.rediff.com/news/report/prof-c-n-r-rao-becomes-third-scientist-to-be-awarded-bharat-
ratna/20131116.htm accessed 5july 2016,5 20 pm

The jury found that Thicke and Williams had committed copyright
infringement and and ended up paying $7.3 million to Gaye's family.
 Taylor swift was sued for alleaged plagiarism by Graham who had issued a
$42m lawsuit against Swift, levelling accusations of plagiarism against her. He
alleges that the Shake It Off bears no melodic resemblance to his song Haters
Gone Hate, she had taken the distinctive lyrics of her chorus from his slow
jam, which appears on his album Sexy Ladies.
Graham sings: “Haters gonna hate / Players gonna play / Watch out for them
fakers / They’ll fake you every day.” Swift’s chorus runs: “’Cause the players
gonna play, play, play, play, play / And the haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate,
hate.”69 The case was dismissed, as the jury said that the papers that were
submitted in court were not drafted by a lawyer and it was very vague, and not
substantial evidence was submitted hence dismissing the matter.
 Josephs Biden was standing for the vice president elections, when he fell into
the pitfall of plagiarism, Biden had already been accused of plagiarism in
various of his speech he had given, biden was accuse of plagiarism when he
was way back in law school around 1988, where he has plagiarised his
assignment in the subject of research methodology and hence with the
disclosure of this information he has to withdraw from the vice president
elections.
 Barack Obama has given various speech’s but the one he had given in
Wisconsin had raise many questions of plagiarism. As Hillary Clinton has
accuse him of copying the speech of Patrick . Obama in his defence apologies
for it and said that Patrick and he has shared various ideas thoughts, phrases
and it was a mere use of “just words” there were similarities but he did not
meant to plagiarism someone else speech.
 German defence minister resigns in PhD plagiarism, Karl-Theodor zu
Guttenberg German defence minister, he has been accused of plagiarism word
to word the PDH thesis, he upon this apologised and said that he had limited
time to complete his thesis, he has lost his doctorate degree as the allegation of
plagiarism was proved.
69
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2015/11/04/taylor-swift-sued-alleged-plagiarism-shake-
off/75156072/ accessed on 5th
july 2016,9 pm

 A New York times editor was alleged of plagiarism of counterfeiting various
photos , facts etc in this editorial colour, as the new York time is one of the
famous newspaper in new york, the editor Jayson Blair was dismissed from
his position, as soon as it was found out that it was not just one artice that has
been plagiarised but there were various other articles which he had already
plagiarised in the past.
 Annatte Schavan was a German education and research minster who was
accused of plagiarism in her PhD thesis, she was accused of using various
secondary sources and had not attributed any of those sources in her research
paper. She was dismissed from her position and after which her PhD degree
was revoked.
 Barbara Taylor Bradford vs. Sahara Media Entertainment Ltd. on 16 July,
2003, 70 two British co authors, who has written the “the women of
substance” filed a case in India alleging piracy of their book, in the case the
Calcutta high court said the supreme court has set out the principal governing
copyright and that as explained but the apex court, there appeared to be not
much difference between English Copyright law and the Indian copyright law
after stating that there is not copyright is an idea the Calcutta high court made
the following decision71
International copyright laws permit even verbatim lifting of plots from a
literary work in at least two con-texts and two specific doctrines have been
formulated to justify this conduct, viz, doctrine of merger and doctrine of
'sense-a-faire'. According to the first doctrine a verbatim lifting is permitted
when the idea merges with expression and there is no other way to express the
same idea. Under the latter doctrine verbatim lifting is justified when the
incidents, characters or scenes from history which are a practical necessity or
indispensable or at least standard, in the treatment of a given topic. For, e g,
while treating a plot of a historic incident like the world wars many things are
70 https://indiankanoon.org/doc/757852/ accessed on 1 july 2016,at 11 PM
71 Law of intellectual property by V.J Taraporevala,Editon 2 ,2013 publisher Thomson Reuters page 214
paragraph 6.

bound to be same. Again copyright law permits the use of work without the
permission of the copyright owner under 'fair use' exceptions.72
The court laid down that, if two persons looking alike are not the subject of
authors original work literary work, although scenes were lifted from the book
but it was a practice on the morality and ethics and it is not covered under law.
However lifting idea does not give rise to cause of action under the Indian law.
Hence barbara bandfors case was declined under the Indian law.
 The recent and the most plagiarised case in the film industry today is was the “
“Kirit” short documentary which is alleged to be Legal spat had broken out last
week between Bollywood director Shirish Kunder and Nepali director Aneel
Neupane over the plot of Kunder's recently released short film on YouTube'. It
was said that the nepali short film BMB was on the same story line which was
released on YouTube somewhere about 2012 and Aneel Neupane had copied his
plot and that there were various similarities between both the plots of the
documentary. Since plagiarism not always amount’s to copyright infringement ,
after studying this case the judged will have a close look of whose has copied who
and what who has infringe red whose right. It was said the kirit story line over the
few years has been discussed with several people and hence he has not copied the
documentary hence we will have to wait and see if it will be a out of court
settlement or one of the parties will have to pay any such fine to the other party.
72 Perspectives on Copyright: The 'Karishma' Controversy Author(s):K. M. Gopakumar and V. K. Unni Source:
Economic and Political Weekly ,Vol. 38, No. 28 (Jul. 12-18,2003), pp. 2935-2936 Published by: Economic and
Political Weekly StableURL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4413773 Accessed: 27-06-2016 17:05 UTC

5.6 Should Plagiarism and Video mash-up amount to infringement.
Mash up, a style of music that combines samples from various songs, would appear to many
to be the epitome of copyright infringement. In fact, a 2005 court case, Bridgeport v.
Dimension, deemed the unauthorized use of even one second of a sample to be copyright
infringement. Since mash up blends several samples over the course of any one song, it must
certainly be copyright infringement. Right? Not so fast.
the fair use doctrine, which permits the unauthorized use of copyrighted materials under
certain circumstances. air use is a legal doctrine meant to protect works deemed valuable for
society, often shielding works involving first amendment expression, such as parodies. When
reviewing a fair use defence, courts consider such things as how “transformative” the work is,
the substantiality of the portion used, and the effect on the market for the original work. With
this in mind, could a fair use defence be made on behalf of the mash up artist.73
As we know plagiarism dose not amount to infringement, we even now know that if more
than substantial work is used it would amount to copyright infringement, we need to keep in
mind that even if the work is in public domain we need to attribute the author, yes under fair
use we have been given few right not to tribute the author , but that is were limited, it can
only be done when it is used for education ,research etc and it is not used for monitory
purpose,
On the other hand we even know that video mash up or the term mash up means mix of
various videos short clips and music mixed and made one, it would totally amount to
infringement, but only when the work is used widely for monitory benefit or a substantial part
of the work is used without attribution.
Secondly the most important thing it keep in mind is, if we copy a part of the work, we
should make sure it is credited because even a small portion of the work can be the heart of
the work, in mash up video it is made so there might be some similarity in the music why he
has taken that video or sound or music, is made into a total new work although it is copied
from someone else, hence we need to keep in mind that the originals work’s monitory
benefit is not lost and this new work has maintained to keep the identity of the original work.
73
https://www.rocketlawyer.com/blog/mashups-and-sampling-whats-fair-use-97506 accessed on 5july 2016, 5
20 pm

Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Film 410 F.3d 792 (6th Cir. 2005) .The case was
between N.W.A.’s song "100 Miles and Runnin'" and Funkadelic's "Get Off Your Ass and
Jam". N.W.A. sampled a two-second guitar chord from Funkadelic's tune, lowered the pitch
and looped it five times in their song, the court obverses that it would amount ti copyright
infringement , and that in which the jury has written to get a licence and do not sample from
anyone elses work, here in this matter, permission was not taken from the original copyright
holder.
The Canadian copyright law has made a amendment in their status regarding mash up, This
exception is enumerated in section 29.21 of the Copyright Act, RSC 1985, c. C-42 (a new
piece of legislation that was introduced into the Copyright Act in 2012) – this provision is
sometimes referred to as the "mash-up" provision. This provision states that it is not an
infringement of copyright to use even a substantial amount of a copyrighted work in your
own new work provided that:
1. The copyrighted work has already been published (i.e. made available to the public);
2. Your new work was created for non-commercial purposes;
3. The source of the copyrighted work is mentioned in the new work if it is reasonable in
the circumstances to do so;
4. The creator of the new work had no reason to believe that the copyrighted work was
itself an infringement on another party's copyright; and
5. The use of, and dissemination of, the new work does not have a substantial adverse
effect on the copyrighted work.74
Hence after seeing these , since plagiarism is not a infringement, it would not
be covered under the statue , copyright should be covered under the copyright law and
defined very distinctively and added in the copyright definition so that there would be
a clear understanding, because inspire of the various software that can detect the
plagiarism there is not no remedy, a person can be sue on the plagiarism. therefore it
should be a part of the statute.
74
http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/320054/Copyright/Posting+Videos+On+Youtube+Copyright+Infringemen
t+Or+Not accessed on 5th
july 2016,at 5 20 pm

5.7 Answering the Hypothesis
As we have seen the above different kind of plagiarism not only focusing on online or offline
material but also video mash up and a few example of music plagiarism, we can conclude
that there is not specific material that is copied but various types of material can be copied
and used for their own benefit. Although according to “turninit” has given us a roundabout
idea that verbatim copy is mostly used in the education sector, as we know with the growing
technology students still rely on book and written and now digitalized material for supporting
theory projects.
On the other hand music and plagiarising video clips from short films and movie and various
music video, had increased, this has increased because it with the increase in technology and
the growing competition, we have already studies above that creativity is at its end today
,creative people develop their idea on the basis of other people ideas, as idea cannot be
copyrighted but the various expressions can. Hence what we tires it come down to is, all the
material which is freely available or now or if it is copyrighted or not , once open to the
public can be plagiarised, there strict care has to be taken for such work.
As there is increase in technology it not only helps students to copy material but also other
creative artist who are looking for the break through to come into the lime light. Plagiarism
occurs everywhere and everyone seem to have a understanding towards it they know they are
plagiarise but still for the 2 minutes of fame the inappropriate act is conducted, there are
majority moral implications that is because to the infringer, although if he is a student he will
lose a year, but if he is a famous artist he will lose his identity.
if we want to prevent plagiarism copying or pricy we need to enact law just as Japan primacy
law which prevent people who are found piracy The Recording Industry Association of Japan
(RIAJ) had made it mandatory that if piracy occurs anywhere for uploading content on the
net will be imprisoned for 10 years and to download content it would be 2 year.
In India we need to make such strict rules, with the increasing piracy, Japan on one hand is a
very organised country they know with the increase in priyacy it would hamper the growth of
that country. On the other hand idea is a develop gin country, hence the progress will be
comparatively show as compared to the other countries.

5.7 Mumbai University dealt with the Plagiarism Problem
The Times Of India75 on the 5th on November 2015 gave a major breakthrough, through the
plagiarism problem that has been detected, the university was doling with a lot of copied
research thesis and dissertation and research projects coming their way hence they had to
improve the quality of their thesis and dissertation. The university is going to purchase softer
wear which is used to scrutinize each and every research article and confirm there is not
plagiarism, and hence it will improve the standard of the students in their projects.
Shodhganga, a project launched by the university grants commission, is used by several
Indian universities to detect plagiarism in research work76 the university will have a 2 step
programmes one it will be once used in the software and send it will be unloaded on
shodhganga where it will be free for the people to use and see the reach article which will
help preserve the research thesis and no one will be able to plagiarise it.
Hence by 2015 Mumbai university in the guidelines set has set that all the research and
projects will be seen and skimmed through the plagiarism check, and from then till now all
the projects are undergoing from the plagiarism check software.
UGC Draft Law about Plagiarism
Hindustan times77 on the 27th of July had released this article which say That University
Grants Commission (UGC) had made a draft law for plagiarism in the academic front to rule
out plagiarism from the college and institutions, it has laid down rule as deregistration of
students and the teachers will be dismissed if any of their students have plagiarised. The draft
law has been sent to the human resource development industry for its approval. As we have
seen the rise in the number of plagiarism in various universities, this law been put forth, and
rules have been laid down upon the guidelines of the infringement cause, if it is a trivial
75 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Mumbai-University-will-crack-down-on-plagiarism-Copy-
that/articleshow/45050598.cms accessed on 10 July 2016,at 10:00 PM
76 IBID
77 http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/thesis-cheats-beware-academic-plagiarism-being-made-legal-
offence/story-kQZM2sP9KY1w942ly1xHiP.html accessed on 28 june2016 at 4:45 PM

matter the student will be left with a warning, if the matter is serious then the student will be
dismissed or removed from the course itself,

5.8 Lacuna in the Copyright Act.
Undetected Conflict-of-Laws Problems in Cross-Border Online Copyright
Infringement. The internet presents challenges for private international law. One of the most
important challenge relates to jurisdiction, which is traditionally based on territory or where
or under which law if the contract or infringement takes place the plaintiff will appear. The
internet crosses many borders. When cross-border mistaken is committed that may lead to
transnational litigation. So where does one apply when a cross border infringement occurs?
How does one know under which jurisdiction one should apply? The main lacuna we deal
with when it comes to infringement is online cross border infringement, once material is
released on the internet, it is on the world wide web, which is free and can be used by anyone
and everywhere, how will one protect his or her copyright? How will one know where to file
the case?
The internet allows a computer connected to the network (online) to communicate and
share information globally with any other computer connected to the network. Unprecedented
numbers of people and devices are connected. It is impossible to identify the internet’s
physical boundaries, as it is inherently accessible from every country in the world. Once
information is placed on the internet, it is usually open to all internet users anywhere. In some
cases access may be restricted and regulated by government or may be limited by the content-
provider to subscribers, registrants or specific users. Yet the nature of the internet makes it
virtually impossible, or prohibitively difficult, cumbersome and costly, for a content-provider
to place material on the internet which is accessible in some countries and at the same time
prevent the content from being accessed in specific legal jurisdictions.78
PINCKNEY V MEDIATECH – JURISDICTION ISSUES IN ONLINE COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT CASE
advocate General Niilo Jääskinen ("AG") on 13 June 2013 issued a non-binding
opinion in Pinckney v Mediatech on questions relating to jurisdiction in online cross-border
copyright infringement cases. The French Supreme Court had asked the CJEU to determine
whether the courts of each Member State from which the contents of a website were
accessible, had jurisdiction to rule on alleged copyright infringement claims pursuant to
78
file:///D:/Sayali/Desktop/dissertation/chapter%204/cases/3663451.pdf accessed on 6th july 2016.At 2 :00
pm

Article 5(3) Brussels I Regulation. The AG dismissed the "accessibility" criterion in favour of
a "focus and target" approach already adopted by the CJEU in trade mark and database rights
infringement cases.79
This analysis then localises the place of infringement in the country of the targeted
market. Thus the law of this country will generally apply to incoming transactions to the
extent that these threaten or actually prejudice this country's market, but this law will not
normally apply to outgoing transactions aiming at foreign markets. In Internet cases where
many markets are targeted at once, the court may find it sufficient to base a provisional
injunction on law common to most of the overall marketplaces being threatened; however,
the court should base final monetary awards on the law of each country whose market is
prejudiced. In extreme cases, it might be possible to argue for exceptions to this general
approach by invoking international public policy, the order public international, that
underlies the treaty regime of intellectual property. Such policy is most authoritatively
manifest in the TRIPS Agreement, which provides for specific injunctive remedies to stop
cross-border piracy, while it generally contemplates ‘remedies which constitute a deterrent to
further infringements’80. Thus, in a case where no such remedy is available then the place
where the infringement has occurred, that law of that country will prevail, in some cases
monitory relief has been given in countries where the infringement has occurred. Where
special awards apply country by country in cross-border cases, they may accumulate, with
globally deterrent effects.
Remedial irregularity complicate matters here. To start, the lex fori determines the
procedures for obtaining injunctions and establishing monetary awards. Where suit is brought
in one court for infringement in many countries, this court's procedures might lead to results
different from those otherwise resulting in the courts and under the laws of these other
countries. Further, courts may well differentiate cross-border remedies when digital content
is protected in one country but not in another, but there is no assurance that computers
routing such content within global networks can always be easily reprogrammed to comply
79
file:///D:/Sayali/Downloads/20130628%20-%20Pinckney%20v%20Mediatech.htm accessed 6th
july 2017,2
20Pm
80
http://www.niscair.res.in/sciencecommunication/researchjournals/rejour/jipr/Fulltextsearch/2005/March%20
2005/JIPR-vol%2010-March%202005-pp%20133-140.htmaccessed on 6th
july 2016,2 20pm.

with such differentiated relief. Still other problems will arise as computerized systems are
introduced to manage or police digital content.81
Courts will increasingly encounter difficult conflicts of laws in the field of
intellectual property. Many difficulties may be resolved by localising infringing acts with an
eye to satisfying the remedial desiderata of the international regime. Accordingly, the laws of
the countries whose markets are respectively targeted or prejudiced by the transactions at
issue in a case will most often best provide bases for relief. Other difficulties, however, arise
out of basic disharmonies, some substantive and some procedural, and courts will have to
exercise their ingenuity to resolve them as equitably as they can from case to case. Progress
towards a systematic international code of intellectual property, or towards globalised
dispute-resolution regimes in the field, would eventually help us transcend such difficulties.82
Therefore if we see there is a major lacuna in the intellectual property law, as we do
not know where what lies, how will we overcome the cross border issue, as there is no line
which is dividing the countries virtually, but still there is infringement happening in different
countries so for now we can only go to that country where the infringement occurs and file a
suit in that country, we need to work towards bring the countries together or at least have a
data base which is which will secure or track where the infringement has actually occurred,
but need to be systematic for cross border infringement, first of all we need to have various
software which can detect infringement cross border, that is once a material is on the net it
should be protected by copyright and hence it should be in the database of that country, if
anyone from another country tries to copy the matter it will be shown immediately and hence
a stop can be put to the infringement, or we would at least know in which country the
infringement has occurred and all the countries together could have one uniform intellectually
property law.
This is a highly debatable issue, various countries will have various point of views,
brining the countries together and to zero them to one law or convention will be a highly
impossible.
81
Supra Note 45
82
http://www.niscair.res.in/sciencecommunication/researchjournals/rejour/jipr/Fulltextsearch/2005/March%20
2005/JIPR-vol%2010-March%202005-pp%20133-140.htmaccessed on 6th
july 2016,2 20 pm

84False attribution of work. Under the United Kingdome act
“(1)A person has the right in the circumstances mentioned in this section—
(a)not to have a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work falsely attributed to him as author,
and
(b)not to have a film falsely attributed to him as director;
and in this section an “attribution”, in relation to such a work, means a statement (express or
implied) as to who is the author or director.
(2)The right is infringed by a person who—
(a)issues to the public copies of a work of any of those descriptions in or on which there is a
false attribution, or
(b)exhibits in public an artistic work, or a copy of an artistic work, in or on which there is a
false attribution.
(3)The right is also infringed by a person who—
(a)in the case of a literary, dramatic or musical work, performs the work in public [F1or
communicates it to the public]as being the work of a person, or
(b)in the case of a film, shows it in public [F1or communicates it to the public] as being
directed by a person,
knowing or having reason to believe that the attribution is false.
(4)The right is also infringed by the issue to the public or public display of material
containing a false attribution in connection with any of the acts mentioned in subsection (2)
or (3).
(5)The right is also infringed by a person who in the course of a business—
(a)possesses or deals with a copy of a work of any of the descriptions mentioned in
subsection (1) in or on which there is a false attribution, or
(b)in the case of an artistic work, possesses or deals with the work itself when there is a false
attribution in or on it,

knowing or having reason to believe that there is such an attribution and that it is false.
(6)In the case of an artistic work the right is also infringed by a person who in the course of a
business—
(a)deals with a work which has been altered after the author parted with possession of it as
being the unaltered work of the author, or
(b)deals with a copy of such a work as being a copy of the unaltered work of the author,
knowing or having reason to believe that that is not the case.
(7)References in this section to dealing are to selling or letting for hire, offering or exposing
for sale or hire, exhibiting in public, or distributing.
(8)This section applies where, contrary to the fact—
(a)a literary, dramatic or musical work is falsely represented as being an adaptation of the
work of a person, or
(b)a copy of an artistic work is falsely represented as being a copy made by the author of the
artistic work,
as it applies where the work is falsely attributed to a person as author.” 83 this section laid
down the principle that copyright Inuk of false attribution which is known as plagiarism
would amount to infringement. The copyright Design and Patents Act 1988 made it very
clear with the introduction of this section.
83 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/84 accessed on 13 july 2016,3:00 Pm

5.9 Future scope of research
 In today’s world how can one minimise plagiarism
Plagiarism is copying someone else’s work or idea and passing it off as one’s own, it
is really tuff to curb plagiarism we need to have effective way to curb plagiarism, the various
ways to curb plagiarism is already known to use, by citing the sources from where one has
acquired their material, by going through a plagiarism check, but these all are techniquical
check that have to be done, how done one actually curb plagiarism, it is a difficult task firstly
the educational institutions should be give the material or topic well in advance to the
students, apart from that regular guidance has to be given to the students from time to time, a
set a rules which have to be followed by the universities, apart from all this one main point to
be considered is how to evoke the creativity in the students mind, so that he or she would not
plagiarise, there is a really thing line between inspiration and copying the process of learning
often students tend to copy, there fail to understand that they are not original but copying
what is already there, and with the matter freely available it makes it easy to copy matters,
hence a full research has to be done as to how we would differentiate between inspiration and
copying. A study can be conducted on how to inspire a student and ways to give them a
understanding on what is plagiarism.
 How will the growing technology help one to curb plagiarism?
well if we see in today’s world with the amount of inflow of knowledge we get from
various sources, college library, online sources , journals, statues etc. One really needs to
know onto how to curb plagiarism, college and institutes, now a days are keeping a close
watch on the plagiarism and intentions copying. the most important way to avoid plagiarism
are the one that has been cause intentionally, If you copy a paper from a classmate, or from
the Internet, or a copy a full paragraph from a book, article, or Web site without attributing
the author, one is said to plagiarizing. We have many software in today’s world which will
catch plagiarism, how do we know how effective it is, as we know copyright law does not
protect idea, but what if the idea is taken from someone’s works and paraphrased and used in
their writing, hence it will be highly difficult to figure out plagiarism, as plagiarism software
will only protect the work that has been copied word to word, copying an idea and expressing
it in another way is a different process altogether, but paraphrasing the idea itself would

amount to plagiarism. Just introducing a new software and using work will highlight the
plagiarism, but will fail to curb it.
 Is there any way plagiarism prevention technology that could detect duplicate
video content across the web?
As we know with the growing technology, we know there are software that can
protect plagiarism, but there are not video software for video which could detect video
content, it is very difficult to understand and mishaps are really difficult because they
are a mix up of various videos it will be sometimes very had to find out if the person
has plagiarised the song, as songs now a days can be downloaded very easily and
various mash up software avaibles can mix up the material, but here we can have a
study of how can one identify video mash up as so many software are not available to
find out video plagiarism. A study can be done on how one finds out video plagiarism
and how will one work towards it.

Bibliography:-
Primary Sources
Statues/Conventions
I. Berne Convention 1971,
II. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 1967,
III. Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 1995,
IV. THE Universal Copyright Convention (1952),
V. The Copyright Act 1956,
VI. The WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) (1996),
VII. Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Cases:-
Amar Nath Seghal v. Union of India(2002(2)ARBLR130(Delhi);
2005(30)PTC253(Del)
Baker v. Selden. 101 U.S. 99.
Barbara Taylor Bradford vs Sahara Media Entertainment Ltd. 2004 (1) CHN 448,
2004 (28) PTC 474 Cal, 2003 47 SCL 445 Cal
Blackwood And Sons Ltd. And Ors. vs A.N. Parasuraman And Ors. AIR 1959 Mad
410 on 28 February, 1958
Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma LAWS(KER)-1996-2-40 High Court Of Kerala
Decided on February 27,1996
Donaldson v. Beckett (1774) 2 Brown's Parl
Hubbard v Vosper, [1972] 2 Q.B. 84,
Millar v. Taylor (1769) 4 Burr.
R.G Anand vs M/S. Delux Films & Ors on 18 August, 1978 (AIR 1978 SC 1613)
Smt. Mannu Bhandari v. Kala Vikash Pictures Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. AIR 1987 Delhi 13,
ILR 1986 Delhi 191
Super Cassettes Industries ... vs Mr Chintamani Rao & Ors. on 11 November, 2011

Vipul Amrutlal Shah vs Shree Venkatesh Films Pvt. Ltd. & ... on 10 August, 2009
Secondary Sources
Books
1. Bently, Lionel Davis, Jennifer Ginsburg, Jane C ; Copyright and Piracy;
Cambridge University Press; October 2010.
2. Dr B.L. Wadehra ; Law of Intellectual Property right 15th Edition; Universal Law
Publishing Co ;5th Edition, November , 2015
3. Dr Fareed Ahmad Rafiqi; Copyright Protection and Information Technology, An
Indian perspective; Law Publisher (india) Pvt. Ltd. November , 2011
4. Kevin Garnett & Gillian Davies Volume II; Copinger and skond james on
copyright; South Asian Edition; Volume II; DATE PUBLISHED; 15th Edition,
November , 2005
5. Halbritter,Bump New Media Theory : Mics, Cameras, Symbolic Action : Audio-
Visual Rhetoric for Writing Teachers; Parlor Press; November 2012
6. Ogawa, Megumi.; Intellectual Property Law Library, Volume 2 : Protection of
Broadcasters' Rights.; Ogawa, Megumi;Martinus Nijhoff
7. MacFarlane, Robert; Original Copy : Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-
Century Literature; Oxford University Press, UK; March 2007
8. Patry, William; How to Fix Copyright; Oxford University Press, USA; November
2011.
9. Marsh, Bill ;Plagiarism ; Synny Press, March 2007.
10. Bloch, Joel; Plagiarism, Intellectual Property and the Teaching of L2 Writing :
Explorations in the Detection based Approach; Channel View Publications; March
2012
11. Amerika, Mark; Remix the book; University of Minnesota Press; August 2011.

12. Rhodes, Brett D ; Copyright Law and a Brief Look at the Google Library Project;
Nova; August 2010.
13. Rife, Martine Courant; Invention, Copyright, and Digital Writing; Southern
Illinois University Press; January 2013.
14. Seiter, Bill, Seiter, Ellen ; Creative Artist's Legal Guide : Copyright, Trademark
and Contracts in Film and Digital Media Production; Yale University Press ; June
2012
15. Sparrow, Andrew; Film and Television Distribution and the Internet : A Legal
Guide for the Media Industry; Gower ; April 2016.
16. Demers, Joanna; Steal This Music : How Intellectual Property Law Affects
Musical Creativity; University of Georgia Press; February 2006
17. V J Taraporevala ; Law of Intellectual Property right 2nd Edition; Thomson
Reuters; Thomson Reuters.November , 2013
18. Vaidhyanathan, Siva; Copyrights and Copywrongs : The Rise of Intellectual
Property and How it Threatens Creativity (1), NYU Press, August 2001
19. W. Cornnish & D. Llewelyn, Intellectual Property: Patents, Copyright,
Trademarks and allied Rights ; Sweet & Maxwell 2007.
20. Sahid Alikhan & Raghunath Mashlkar; Intellectual Property and Competitive
Strategies in 21st Century 2nd Edition (English); Kluwer Law International,
march 2004.
Journal/ Report:
1) Plagiarism and Ideology: Identity in Intercultural Discourse.
Author(s): Ron Scollo, 27-06-2016 18:23 UTC
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4168579
2) Using Writing Assignment Designs to Mitigate Plagiarism
Author(s): Nina C. Heckler, David R. Forde and C. Hobson Bryan Source: Teaching
Sociology ,

Vol. 41, No. 1 (JANUARY 2013), pp. 94-105 Published by: American Sociological
Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41725583 Accessed: 27-06-2016 17:06 UTC
3) Perspectives on Copyright: The 'Karishma' Controversy
Author(s): K. M. Gopakumar and V. K. Unni Source: Economic and Political
Weekly ,
Vol. 38, No. 28 (Jul. 12-18, 2003), pp. 2935-2936 Published by: Economic and
Political Weekly Stable
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4413773 Accessed: 27-06-2016 17:05 UTC
4) The White Paper Plagiarism,
Turnitin.com
URL:https://www2.nau.edu/dlearn/support/tutorials/academicintegrity/pdf/Turnitin_
WhitePaper_PlagiarismSpectrum.pdf
5) HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF COPYRIGHT LAW IN INDIA
Author: Charu Dureja
URL:- http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Jan2015/7.pdf
6) Coming to Terms: Plagiarism
Author(s): Darsie Bowden
Source: The English Journal , Vol. 85, No. 4, Literary Festival (Apr., 1996), pp. 82-84
Published by: National Council of Teachers of English Stable
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/819650 Accessed: 12-06-2016 13:30 UT
7) Copyright Fair Use: Case Law and Legislation
Source: Duke Law Journal , Vol. 1969, No. 1 (Feb., 1969), pp. 73-109
Published by: Duke University School of Law Stable
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1371458 Accessed: 14-06-2016 03:28 UTC
8) Plagiarism and Poetic Identity in Martial
Author(s): J. Mira Seo
Source: The American Journal of Philology , Vol. 130, No. 4 (Winter, 2009), pp.
567-593
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press Stable
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20616209
Accessed: 12-06-2016 05:50 UTC
9) The History of Copyright Author(s): L. Quincy Mumford
Source: ALA Bulletin , Vol. 46, No. 2 (FEBRUARY 1952), pp. 45-47

Published by: American Library Association Stable
URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25693654
Accessed: 13-06-2016 13:53 UTC
10) The Anti-Copyright Crusade
Report Information from ProQuest
June 14 2016 01:1
11) Transforming Dimension of IPR: Challenges for New Age Libraries
Foreword by Prof. (Dr.) Ranbir Singh Vice Chancellor, National Law University,
Delhi
http://www.nludelhi.ac.in/download/publication/2015/Transforming%20Dimension%
20of%20IPR%20-%20Challenges%20for%20New%20Age%20Libraries.pdf
12) Jurisdiction over Cross-Border Wrongs on the Internet
Author(s): Oren Bigos Source: The International and Comparative Law Quarterly,
Vol. 54, No. 3 (Jul., 2005), pp. 585-620
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the British Institute of
International and Comparative Law Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3663451
Accessed: 06-07-2016 08:30 UTC.
Newspaper and E-database:-
1. UGC to control plagiarism; 2 July 2016; Education of News Agency India. Author
Unknown. http://www.enaindia.in/news/newsdetails/policy/acts-regulations/ugc-to-
control-plagiarism.
2. Thesis cheats beware! Academic plagiarism being made legal offence; Hindustan
Times, New Delhi; Updated: Jun 26, 2016 08:12 Author Neelam Pandey.
3. Prof C N R Rao becomes third scientist to be awarded Bharat Ratna; Rediff.com;
http://www.rediff.com/news/report/prof-c-n-r-rao-becomes-third-scientist-to-be-
awarded-bharat-ratna/20131116.htm%20%20seen%20on.%20%205july%202016

References:-
1. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-times/Whats-the-origin-of-the-word-
plagiarism/articleshow/1519035.cms Accessed on12th June 2016.
2. Stealing the Fire. Amsterdam, NL: Rodopi, 2010. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 12 June
2016.
3. https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2011/10/04/the-world%E2%80%99s-first-
plagiarism-case/ last Accessed on12th june 2016
4. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/04/on-plagiarism/302469/ 12th
june 2016
5. Marsh, Bill. Plagiarism. Ithaca, US: SUNY Press, 2007. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 12
June 2016.
6. http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.svkm.ac.in:2048/docview/1698951455/49DDF4B
165F42A1PQ/2?accountid=32277 last Accessed on12th June 2016.
7. http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.svkm.ac.in:2048/docview/908974952/1A32C11D
1A6E407DPQ/7?accountid=32277 last Accessed on12th June 2016
8. http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Jan2015/7.pdf accessed on 12th june 2016, at 2:45
Pm
9. http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Jan2015/7.pdf accessed on 12th june 2016, at 2:45
Pm
10. http://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/history.html last Accessed on12th June, 2016 at
12.45 PM
11. http://www.historyofcopyright.org/pb/wp_f12e0c69/wp_f12e0c69.html last Accessed
on12th June 2016, at 12:50 PM
12. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/intel2_e.htm last Accessed on12th June
2016, at 2:00 PM
13. http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Jan2015/7.pdf accessed on 12 june, 2016 at 3:00
PM.
14. The International Journal of Advanced Research in ISSN: 2278-6236 Management
and Social Sciences Impact Factor: 4.400 Vol. 4 | No. 1 | January 2015
www.garph.co.uk IJARMSS accessed on 12 june 2016, at 3:00 PM
15. Indian copyright act 1957.

16. MacFarlane, Robert. Original Copy : Plagiarism and Originality in Nineteenth-
Century Literature. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press, UK, 2007. ProQuest
ebrary. Web. 13 July 2016.
17. Karnataka High Court Shri P M Parameshwaramurthy vs State Of Karnataka on 21
November, 2012 Author: N.Kumar And Rao (plagiarism)
18. http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/public-domain/welcome/ accessed on 10 july
2016, at 12PM
19. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parody accessed on 1dt july 2016, 8 pm
20. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/rome/summary_rome.html accessed on 25 June,
2016 at 3 30Pm
2016 at 3 30Pm
22. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html accessed on 25th June,
2016 at 2:45Pm.
23. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html accessed on 25th June,
2016 at 2:45Pm.
24. http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/treaties/text.jsp?file_id=289795 accessed on 25 june,
2016 at 3 15PM
2016 at 3 30Pm
26. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/summary_wct.html accessed on 25th june,
2016 at 3:00 Pm
27. http://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/wct/summary_wct.html accessed on 25th june,
2016 at 3:00 Pm
28. 1 http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2003/october/tradoc_111709.pdf 25th june
2016 at 3 30 Pm
29. http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2003/october/tradoc_111709.pdf accessed on
25th july at 2 45 pm.
32. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/101702059/ accessed on 25th june, 2016 at 4:00 PM

33. McClure, John S.. Mashup Religion : Pop Music and Theological Invention. Waco,
TX, USA: Baylor University Press, 2011. ProQuest ebrary. Accessed on Web. 28
June 2016 at 4:45 PM.
34. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/supercut accessed on
Wednesday 28th June 2016 at 06:45 PM
35. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/andy-baio last accessed on 28th June 2016,
at 6 50 PM.
36. Copyright protection and information technology, chapter II page no 41, paragraph 1
line 6, by Dr Fareed ahmed Rafiqi.
37. http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/. seen on 1st july 2016, at
7:45 PM.
38. http://www.pulp.up.ac.za/pdf/2011_02/2011_02_m_chapter9.pdf accessed on 1 july
2016, at 7:45 Pm
39. http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/374780/Trademark/Legality+of+Parodies+Much+A
do+about+Nothing . 1 july 2016, 7 45 pm
40. http://www.wipo.int/tools/en/gsearch.html?cx=016458537594905406506%3Ahmturf
wvzzq&cof=FORID%3A11&q=introduction seen on 1 july 2016, 7:45 pm
41. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1710491/ seen on 1 july 2016, 8:00 pm
42. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1990275/ accessed on 1 july 2016, at 7 45 Pm
43. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/331111/ accessed on 1 july 2016, at 7 45 Pm
44. http://www.majmudarindia.com/pdf/Moral%20rights%20of%20an%20author.pdf
accessed on 1july 8 20Pm
45. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1038145/ accessed on 1 july, 2016 at 8:00Pm
46. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1734007/ accessed on 1 july, 2016 at 8:00Pm
47. http://www.lakshmisri.com/Uploads/MediaTypes/Documents/WHITE_PAPER_IP_ar
ticle_idea_expression_dichotomy_esheeta-REVISED.pdf accessed on 1st july 2016.
8 10 pm
48. http://www.plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/what-is-plagiarism/ accessed on 13th July
2016, at 4 45Pm.
49. Copyright Law and a Brief Look at the Google Library Project. New York, US: Nova,
2010. ProQuest ebrary. Web. 13 July 2016.
50. Brown, M. (2015, Mar 17). Is imitation the greatest form of flattery? A look at music
plagiarism and copyright infringement. University Wire Retrieved from

51. Brown, M. (2015, Mar 17). Is imitation the greatest form of flattery? A look at music
plagiarism and copyright infringement. University Wire Retrieved from
52. file:///D:/Sayali/Downloads/Mashups%20Memes%20Remixes%20and%20Copyright.
pdf accessed on 9th july 2016, at 10:00 Pm
53. file:///D:/Sayali/Downloads/Mashups%20Memes%20Remixes%20and%20Copyright.
pdf accessed on 9th july 2016, at 10:00 Pm
54. https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2005/07/04/coldplay-admits-plagiarism/ accessed
on 10 july, 2016 at 10:00 PM
55. http://www.hindustantimes.com/bollywood/top-10-barfi-scenes-that-are-copied/story-
amYxopei4xXHxJHUTgKBJM.html accessed on 10th july 2016, at 10:00 PM.
56. http://www.rediff.com/news/report/prof-c-n-r-rao-becomes-third-scientist-to-be-
awarded-bharat-ratna/20131116.htm seen on. 5july 2016, 5 20 pm
57. http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2015/11/04/taylor-swift-sued-alleged-
plagiarism-shake-off/75156072/ last senn on 5th july 2016, 9 pm
58. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/757852/ accessed on 1 july 2016, at 11 PM
59. Law of intellectual property by V.J Taraporevala, Editon 2 ,2013 publisher Thomson
Reuters page 214 paragraph 6.
60. Perspectives on Copyright: The 'Karishma' Controversy Author(s): K. M. Gopakumar
and V. K. Unni Source: Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 38, No. 28 (Jul. 12-18,
2003), pp. 2935-2936 Published by: Economic and Political Weekly Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4413773 Accessed: 27-06-2016 17:05 UTC
61. https://www.rocketlawyer.com/blog/mashups-and-sampling-whats-fair-use-97506
accessed on 5july 2016, 5 20 pm
62. http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/320054/Copyright/Posting+Videos+On+Youtube+
Copyright+Infringement+Or+Not accessed on 5th july 2016, at 5 20 pm
63. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Mumbai-University-will-crack-down-
on-plagiarism-Copy-that/articleshow/45050598.cms accessed on 10 July 2016, at
10:00 PM
64. http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/thesis-cheats-beware-academic-
plagiarism-being-made-legal-offence/story-kQZM2sP9KY1w942ly1xHiP.html
accessed on 28 june 2016 at 4:45 PM
65. file:///D:/Sayali/Desktop/dissertation/chapter%204/cases/3663451.pdf accessed on
6th july 2016. At 2 :00 pm

66. file:///D:/Sayali/Downloads/20130628%20-%20Pinckney%20v%20Mediatech.htm
accessed 6th july 2017, 2 20PM
67. http://www.niscair.res.in/sciencecommunication/researchjournals/rejour/jipr/Fulltexts
earch/2005/March%202005/JIPR-vol%2010-March%202005-pp%20133-140.htm
accessed on 6th july 2016, 2 20pm.
68. http://www.niscair.res.in/sciencecommunication/researchjournals/rejour/jipr/Fulltexts
earch/2005/March%202005/JIPR-vol%2010-March%202005-pp%20133-140.htm
accessed on 6th july 2016, 2 20 pm
69. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/84 accessed on 13 july 2016,
3:00 Pm

sayali dissertation

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to sayali dissertation

sayali dissertation