Course packs for education ruled legal in
India [Indian copyright law
(specifically section 52(1)(i))]
Supreme
Court ruling a huge triumph for access to educational materials in India
On 9 May
2017, a five year court battle between publishers and universities finally came
to an end when the Supreme Court of India dismissed an appeal by the Indian
Reprographic Rights Organization (IRRO) challenging an earlier judgment of
Delhi High Court that ruled course packs in India legal for educational
purposes.
The facts of the case
In 2012, three academic publishers, Oxford
University Press (OUP), Cambridge University Press (CUP) and Taylor &
Francis, sued the University of Delhi (DU) and Rameshwari Photocopy Service
(based at the university) for copyright infringement for photocopying parts of
their textbooks and distributing them in course packs - collections of assigned
reading materials – exclusively to students for a fee.
The publishers sought to compel Delhi
University to enter into a licensing agreement with the Indian Reprographic Rights
Organization (IRRO), that manages certain rights on behalf publishers and other
rightsholders in India.
The court’s judgment – no infringement, no licence required
On whether the making of the course packs was
a copyright infringement, the court found no infringement because the
activities fell under the education exception in Indian copyright law (specifically section 52(1)(i)).
Section 52(1)(i) of the Indian Copyright Act
(1957) allows any work to be reproduced by a teacher or pupil for the purposes
of instruction. In a liberal interpretation of the provision, the court held
that the reproduction of a work is not limited to reproduction by an individual
teacher or pupil, it also extends to the action of multiple teachers and
students. Further, the court held that the phrase ‘course of instruction’
embraces any instruction for the duration of an entire course or teaching
programme, it is not limited only to teaching in the classroom.
On whether the university must obtain a
licence to photocopy from IRRO, the court held that no licence is required
because the activities are covered by Section 52(1)(i).
The court also found there to be no
commercial exploitation of copyright in the works.
During the case, the publishers tried to
impute a profit motive on the part of the defendants. They argued that by
selling chapters of the books, the defendants were in direct competition with
publishers thereby creating an adverse effect on the publishers’ market.
The court rejected the argument holding that
students are hardly potential customers for multiple books used in the course
packs. For example, post-graduate students might have 35-40 reading assignments
per subject.
Without the course packs, students would
simply look elsewhere for the material, including the university library. In
fact, the court noted that increased access to education has the potential to
expand the customer base for such books in the future.
Impact of the Delhi University case
The ruling in the Delhi University case is a
huge triumph for access to educational materials in India over the interests of
private copyright holders.
The case shone a light on the socio-economic
context of university level education in India, in particular the cost of
textbooks. Students became advocates for access to knowledge, and the law on
access to educational materials in India has been advanced.
Timeline
August 2012: Oxford University Press (OUP),
Cambridge University Press (CUP) and Taylor & Francis issue legal
proceedings against Delhi University and Rameshwari Photocopy Service
October 2012: Interim injunction issued
against Rameshwari Photocopy Service restraining sale of course packs.
March 2013: 33 authors of works cited in
court documents write to publishers asking them to withdraw the case.
September 2016: judgment issued by Justice
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, Delhi High Court; injunction on Rameshwari Photocopy
Service lifted.
October 2016: Publishers file appeal
against Justice Endlaw’s decision.
December 2016: Appeal rejected by Delhi
High Court Division Bench Justices Pradeep Nandrajog and Yogesh Khanna.
April 2017: Indian Reprographic Rights
Organization (IRRO) (that intervened in the lower case) files appeal to the Supreme Court.
Regards
Pralhad
Jadhav
Senior Manager @
Knowledge Repository
Khaitan
& Co
Upcoming Lecture | ACTREC - BOSLA Annual lecture series (125th birth anniversary of father of library
science, Padmashree Dr. S. R. Ranganathan) on Saturday, 12th August 2017 at Advanced Centre for Treatment,
Research and Education in Cancer (ACTREC), Kharghar, Navi Mumbai. (Theme | 'MakerSpace')
No comments:
Post a Comment