Copyright Infringement : T-series vs


Published on

Published in: Education
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Copyright Infringement : T-series vs

  1. 1. T-Series vs. Group 8 Abhishek Singh 12PGP004Bir Bahadur Singh 12PGP014 Harsh Vardhan 12PGP017 Mahesh Kumar 12PGP025Vinnakota Harish 12PGP052 1
  2. 2. What is Copyright?Copyright is a right given by the law to creators of literary, dramatic,musical and artistic works and producers of cinematograph filmsand sound recordings. 2
  3. 3. Indian Copyright Act , 1957The Copyright Act, 1957 governs the laws and applicable rulesrelated to the subject of copyrights in India. British Copyright Copyright Act of the Copyright Act , 1914 Act,1911 UK, 1956 Indian Copyright Act , 1957 3
  4. 4. Indian Copyright Act , 2012In Copyright Amendment Act 2012, many modifications were made.Few of them are: • The bill makes special provisions for those who work in film and sound recordings. • Copyright in a film currently rests with the producer for 60 years. • The bill allows for the production of copyrighted work in special formats. • The act gives authors, or their representatives, the right to claim damages against use of their work. 4
  5. 5. The Case T-Series Music PiracyT series & Piracy DCMA vs T- Series 5
  6. 6. The Case T-Series Music PiracyT series & Piracy DCMA vs T- Series 6
  7. 7. The Case T-Series  T- Series which stands for Trishul Series is a music label owned by the company Super Cassettes Limited (SCIL).  One of the top music labels in India Music Piracy  Market share of 60% and revenue about $4.2 m  Product mix  Original soundtracks of moviesT series & Piracy  Remixes  Old devotional songs DCMA Act  Melodies from 1960s  Pop hits of 1990s etc., vs T- Series
  8. 8. The Case T-Series  Found in 2006, by two IIT graduates  Indigenously made search engine  Product mix Music Piracy  Web search  Vertical searchT series & Piracy  Mobile ads optimization  Provides only music search results  Revenue model : Advertisements in their website DCMA Act  Is a search engine or publisher ? vs T- Series
  9. 9. The Case T-Series  Indian music Industry is a consortium of 142 music companies  Piracy : Most serious problem faced by Indian music Music Piracy industry  Digital market of music : 5000 Cr  Companies make a legitimate profit of : 350 CrT series & Piracy  Lack of awareness or carelessness of the netizen  Enforcing rights has been not easy given the DCMA Act complexity of the vs T- Series
  10. 10. The Case T-Series  Since offline consumption is already suffering losses, they shifted towards the leaks in online content  T-series also stated that companies like MSN and Yahoo can’t take a safe harbor under DMCA ACT because the copyright holder is indian. So, Indian Music Piracy Copyright Act is applicable.  T- Series is fighting a series of copyright battles onT series & Piracy  Google  Zee TV DCMA Act  MSN  vs T-  Series
  11. 11. The Case T-Series  Digital Millennium Copyright Act was passed in 1998  Under this act, it is a crime to produce technology, Music Piracy tools and services which fudge the access to copyrighted works.  DMCA also took also took care to amplify theT series & Piracy penalties for copyright infringement on the internet. DCMA vs T- Series
  12. 12. The Case T-Series  initially popular for music search slowly gained popularity as pirated music search engine  Servers of didn’t hold any pirated music but it promoted the pirated music through its own homepage search results. Music Piracy  They have also created a dedicated page for these songsT series & Piracy  Used “deep linking” to provide access to pirated music DCMA Act  The real problem lies with sites like which hold pirated songs in their vs T- Series
  13. 13. The Case T-Series  On July 16, 2008 T-series issued notice to  T-series accuses for offering meta-data (listing and song tags) instead of merely displaying links.  responded that it has done what a search Music Piracy engine is supposed to do and is not hosting the copyrighted contentT series & Piracy  T-series also stated that have an ad program where ads on serious offenders in music DCMA Act piracy like, and others are displayed whom used to pay them as per vs T- contract Series
  14. 14. The Case T-Series  These songs belong to SCIL Copyright Ownership  tried proving that they only pointed consumers towards content  The FIR registered in Bangalore is for infringement and displaying on the following film Music Piracy songs  All the BestT series & Piracy  Om Shanti Om  Bhool Bhulaiya DCMA Act  Apka Suroor  Aashiq Banaya vs T- Series
  15. 15. The Case T-Series  A criminal prosecution under the copyright act, is independent of the civil actions of injunctions and damages, and a copyright owner is at liberty to choose either or both these remedies, under the law. Music Piracy  T-Series argued in court that the Information Technology Act 2008 does not provide certainT series & Piracy intermediaries and platforms with safe harbor against any kind of copyright violation DCMA Act  As the servers, contact details and offices of were in India therefore Copyright vs T- 1957 was rightly applicable in this case. Series
  16. 16. The Case T-Series ’s first defense is to show the disclaimer Disclaimer : Guruji Music lets you search and listen to old, new, latest mp3 songs and ringtones. However, we have no liability for Music Piracy websites that claim to have free mp3 downloads. indexes third party websites and does not have control over, nor any liability for the content of such thirdT series & Piracy party websites. If you believe that any of the search results above, link to content that infringes your copyright, please contact us. DCMA Act  This disclaimer was a straight vs T- Series
  17. 17. The Case T-Series What went wrong with Music PiracyT series & Piracy DCMA vs T- Series
  18. 18. The Case T-Series  They haven’t maintained anonymity – All the details of the management team along with their addresses are made available on the website  On the other hand, Pulki another popular Indian music search engine played it safe Music Piracy  The law and land are not in favor of  Other music piracy websites have servers outsideT series & Piracy India/ Outside Indian’s court purview.  The difference in the Power Index DCMA Act  It was like a fight between a giant shark and a tiny vs T- Series
  19. 19. The Case T-Series Music PiracyT series & Piracy DCMA Act The vs T- Series
  20. 20. The Case T-Series  removed the search links for music and songs from its site  Shut down its music search site in 2011  Shutting was not and will never be the Music Piracy solution for the war against piracy because the real players responsible for piracy like are stillT series & Piracy free out  To stop these kinds of IP offences Indian cyber laws DCMA Act along with world’s cyber and copyright laws must come to a vs. T- Series
  21. 21. InterpretationSection 14Section 27 T-series is the sole owner (author) of the content posted on their site.Section 51 As per Sec 14.Meaning of copyright.-For the purposes of this Act, "copyright" means the exclusive rightSection 63 subject to the provisions of this Act, to do or authorize the doing of any of the following acts in respect of a work or any substantial part thereof,(iv) to make anySection 64 cinematograph film or sound recording in respect of the work)Section 69Section 79 21
  22. 22. InterpretationSection 14Section 27 The copyright was valid under Sec 27Section 51 According to which in the case of a sound recording, copyright shall subsist until sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the yearSection 63 in which the sound recording is published. There was no license granted by T-series toSection 64 for use of their copyright.Section 69Section 79 22
  23. 23. InterpretationSection 14 violated the copyright act by posting the content for downloading and listening and giving providing further links to the copyright content.Section 27 Under sec 51.-Copyright in a work shall be deemed toSection 51 be infringed- (a) when any person, without a license granted by the owner of the copyright or the Registrar ofSection 63 Copyrights under this Act- (i) does anything, the exclusive right to do which is by this Act conferred upon the owner of theSection 64 copyright, or (ii) permits for profit any place to be used for the communication of the work to the public where suchSection 69 communication constitutes an infringement of the copyrightSection 79 23
  24. 24. InterpretationSection 14Section 27 Arrest of Anurag Dod, CEO of Sec 63.Offence of infringement of copyright or otherSection 51 rights conferred by this Act. Any person who Knowingly infringes or abets the infringement of- (a) the copyright in a work, orSection 63 (b) any other right conferred by this Act, except the right conferred by section 53A shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less thanSection 64 six months but which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand rupees but which may extend to two lakh rupees.Section 69Section 79 24
  25. 25. InterpretationSection 14Section 27 Seizure of the servers, storage media and other equipment.Section 51 As per the Sec 64 of The Copyright Act 1957 which states that: Any police officer, not below the rank of a sub-inspector, may, if he is satisfied that an offenceSection 63 under infringement of copyright in any work has been, is being, or is likely to be, committed, seize without warrant, all copies of the work, and all platesSection 64 used for the purpose of making infringing copies of the work, wherever found, and all copies and plates so seized.Section 69Section 79 25
  26. 26. InterpretationSection 14 Arrest of Employees of Under Sec 69 Offences by companies.-Section 27 (1) Where any offence under this Act has been committed by a company, every person who at the time the offence was committed was in charge of,Section 51 and was responsible to the company for, the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company shall be deemed to be guilty of suchSection 63 offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-sectionSection 64 (1), where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company, and it is proved that the offence was committed with the consent orSection 69 connivance of, or is attributable to any negligence on the part of, any director, manager, secretary orSection 79 other officer of the company. 26
  27. 27. InterpretationSection 14Section 27 The Information Technology Act 2008 (Amended 2010) does not provide certain intermediaries andSection 51 platforms like with safe harbour against Copyright violation.Section 63 Central Government Act Section 79 in the Information Technology Act, 2000 says that- information or data made available by him if he proves that the offence orSection 64 contravention was committed without his knowledge or that he had exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence or contravention.Section 69Section 79 27
  28. 28. 28