INTRODUCTION
In today’s modern age of technology, the realm of intellectual property has experienced substantial changes, specifically in regards to copyright, fair use, and plagiarism. The rise of the internet and digital technologies has completely transformed how information is shared, presenting unique obstacles to the established legal structures that protect intellectual property rights. In order to fully understand the intricacies surrounding copyright infringement, fair use, and plagiarism in the digital world, it is crucial to explore the historical context and relevant factors that have influenced the present state of affairs.[1]
The concept of copyright has a long history, dating back to ancient times. During this period, there were measures in place to safeguard literary and artistic creations, such as royal charters and privileges granted by sovereigns. Nevertheless, the concept of copyright came into existence during the fifteenth century, when the printing press was introduced. This invention made it possible to reproduce and distribute literary works on a large scale. The Statute of Anne in 1710 is widely regarded as the inaugural copyright law, offering authors and creators legal safeguards by granting them exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute their works for a specified duration. In the modern era, the rapid advancement of digital technologies, such as the internet, has completely transformed the way content is created, shared, and consumed. Although the progress made in technology has made information more accessible and encouraged innovation, it has also brought about intricate legal concerns surrounding the safeguarding and implementation of intellectual property rights. The proliferation of digital content sharing has heightened concerns surrounding issues of copyright infringement, fair use, and plagiarism.[2]
Evolution and Principles of Fair Use
The development of Fair Use is an intriguing trajectory that mirrors the shifting terrain of copyright legislation and its convergence with societal conventions and technological progress. Fair Use originated from common law principles and later became a legislative concept in the United States with the passing of the Copyright Act of 1976.[3]
The concept of Fair Use originated from the acknowledgment by courts that specific uses of copyrighted content might benefit the public without excessively violating the rights of copyright owners. The initial legal interpretations recognised that it is not necessary to impose stringent copyright protection on all instances of copyrighted works. In contrast, the judiciary acknowledged the significance of permitting restricted use of copyrighted content in order to foster creativity, innovation, unrestricted speech, education, and several other societal concerns. Nevertheless, the notion of Fair Use remained predominantly ambiguous and indeterminate until the implementation of the Copyright Act of 1976. This significant law established a legal structure that formally outlined and broadened the concepts of Fair Use. The criteria for assessing the eligibility of a certain use as Fair Use are outlined in Section 107 of the Copyright Act. The variables encompassed in this analysis comprise the aim and type of the utilisation, the inherent qualities of the copyrighted work, the quantity and significance of the section employed, and the impact of the utilisation on the prospective market for the original work. The Copyright Act of 1976, with the incorporation of Fair Use into statutory law, offered valuable elucidation and direction for judges, copyright holders, and individuals using copyrighted content. It created a versatile structure that enabled the adjustment of Fair Use principles to changing social standards, technological progress, and shifts in the creative environment. The courts were able to apply the Fair Use doctrine to various contexts, including both traditional media formats and burgeoning digital platforms, because to its flexibility. Furthermore, the legislative formulation of Fair Use granted courts the authority to establish a substantial corpus of legal precedents that subsequently enhanced and broadened the fundamental tenets of Fair Use. The cases of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. and Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises established significant legal precedents and offered valuable information regarding the implementation of Fair Use in many situations, such as parody, criticism, news reporting, and educational purposes. The progression of Fair Use from its common law roots to its formalisation in statutory law signifies a noteworthy achievement in the advancement of copyright legislation. The statement demonstrates a sophisticated comprehension of the equilibrium between the entitlements of copyright owners and the societal benefit of fostering creativity, innovation, and information accessibility. The concept of Fair Use is crucial in allowing the interchange of ideas, promoting cultural expression, and supporting the advancement of knowledge and society.[4]
Purpose and Character of the Use:
The initial tenet of Fair Use, which centres on the intention and nature of the use, plays a crucial role in assessing the equity of a specific application of copyrighted content. This concept prioritises the transformative nature of the usage and the degree to which it introduces new value or modifies the original work’s expression.[5] Courts meticulously assess whether the use of a copyrighted work serves a distinct purpose or function in comparison to the original work. Transformative uses encompass the act of reusing or recontextualizing copyrighted material in a manner that introduces novel insights, expanded meanings, or alternative views. Criticism, commentary, satire, and news reporting sometimes employ transformational techniques by providing fresh interpretations or critiques of the original work. The aforementioned transformative applications play a significant role in enhancing societal well-being through the facilitation of creativity, intellectual engagement, and the sharing of ideas. Consequently, these endeavours are in accordance with the fundamental objectives of copyright legislation, which aim to advance knowledge and culture. Furthermore, courts consider if the use is intended for commercial or nonprofit educational objectives. Although commercial usage does not inherently render a use ineligible for fair use, Fair usage analysis tends to accord greater weight to charitable and educational applications. Nonprofit and educational endeavours commonly cater to wider society concerns through the facilitation of knowledge accessibility, the cultivation of learning prospects, and the advancement of educational goals. Consequently, they are more inclined to be considered equitable according to the first premise of Fair Use. In general, the initial concept of Fair Use emphasises the need of taking into account the transformative character of the use and its overall societal impact. Fairness is more likely to be attributed to transformative uses that contribute novel value, insights, or perspectives to the original work, irrespective of whether the usage is for commercial or nonprofit educational objectives. The first principle of Fair Use promotes the basic ideals of free speech, expression, and innovation while also balancing the rights of copyright holders by giving priority to transformative applications that enhance public conversation and encourage the flow of ideas.[6]
Nature of the Copyrighted Work:
The second tenet of Fair Use, which centres on the inherent characteristics of the original work, is important in assessing the equity of a specific utilisation of copyrighted material. This concept considers several criteria, such as the publication status of the work and its inclination towards either factual or artistic elements. The concept in question takes into account the publication status of the copyrighted work, namely whether it is published or unpublished. Copyright protection is often more robust for published works that are extensively distributed and accessible to the general public. On the other hand, unpublished works, which have not been intentionally made accessible to the public by the copyright holder, may be granted more flexibility under the Fair Use doctrine. Courts may exhibit a greater propensity to deem the use of unpublished works as equitable where they serve significant public interests, such as the purposes of criticism, commentary, or scholarly endeavours. Another aspect that is taken into account is if the copyrighted work exhibits a greater inclination towards factual or artistic elements. Novels, music compositions, and films, which are considered creative works, are eligible for enhanced copyright protection because of their unique and expressive qualities. The application of Fair Use to creative works remains relevant, particularly where the utilisation of such works serves transformational objectives or helps to the advancement of the public interest. An instance of fair use might be observed in the form of criticism, parody, or commentary on a novel, provided that it contributes unique insights or viewpoints to the original piece of work. On the other hand, works that are factual or educational in nature, such as news stories, scientific data, or historical documents, may be eligible for a wider scope of Fair Use protection. These books encompass factual and objective material that is crucial for public deliberation, educational purposes, and the progression of knowledge. Courts may exhibit a greater propensity to deem the use of factual works as equitable, particularly where this utilisation serves significant public objectives, such as news dissemination, scholarly investigation, or educational purposes. In Fair Use analysis, the nature of the copyrighted material is a crucial determinant. Copyright protection for creative works is often more robust, however Fair Use may still be applicable in cases when the use of such works achieves transformative objectives or contributes to the public interest. The inclusion of objective facts and information necessary for public debate and education in factual works may potentially expand the scope of Fair Use. Courts endeavour to achieve a harmonious equilibrium between safeguarding the rights of copyright holders and advancing significant public interests in the realms of free speech, expression, and the dissemination of ideas, taking into account the inherent characteristics of the copyrighted work.[7]
Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used:
The third element of Fair Use, which pertains to the quantity and significance of the piece utilised in relation to the entirety of the original work, plays a crucial role in assessing the equity of a specific utilisation of copyrighted material. This concept evaluates the extent and calibre of the fraction utilised in respect to the primary piece.[8] Courts evaluate the quantity of the component utilised by taking into account the degree to which the copyrighted item is replicated, disseminated, shown, or executed. Although the use of a whole piece of work does not inherently exclude a determination of Fair usage, courts assess whether the quantity employed is suitable in proportion to the intended purpose of the usage. The utilisation of limited segments of a piece of work, such as quotations, excerpts, or samples, can nevertheless be deemed equitable provided it is essential for attaining the transformative objective of the utilisation and does not beyond what is reasonably required. Courts assess not only the amount but also the quality of the piece utilised, specifically examining whether it comprises the core of the work or the most important components. The core or substance of the copyrighted content, which is integral to its value and purpose, is sometimes referred to as the heart of the work. Utilising the core content or the most important elements of the work may potentially hinder the determination of Fair Use, particularly if it weakens the market for the original work or denies the copyright owners the financial advantages linked to it. In the context of Fair Use analysis, it is crucial to take into account both the quantity and significance of the piece utilised in relation to the entirety of the copyrighted work. Although the use of limited segments of a piece of work may still be deemed equitable, the excessive utilisation of the core content or the most noteworthy components may potentially undermine the determination of Fair Use. Courts strive to achieve a harmonious equilibrium between safeguarding the rights of copyright holders and advancing significant public interests in free speech, expression, and the interchange of ideas by evaluating both the amount and quality of the part utilised.
Effect of the Use Upon the Potential Market:
The assessment of fairness in a specific use of copyrighted material heavily relies on the fourth principle of Fair Use, which examines the impact of the usage on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. This concept assesses the potential negative effects on the market for the original work or its potential market value resulting from its utilisation. Courts conduct a thorough analysis to determine if the use has a detrimental effect on the market for the original work. If the use acts as a direct replacement for the original work or reduces its worth in the market, it is less probable to be deemed equitable. For instance, in cases where the unauthorised reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work has a substantial negative impact on the copyright owner’s sales or licencing prospects, it might potentially undermine the determination of Fair Use. Likewise, if the use diminishes the financial motivation for producing or distributing the original work, it might be considered unjust.[9] On the other hand, if the use generates a fresh market or enhances the worth of the original work, it might substantiate a determination of Fair Use. Transformative uses, such as critical reviews, commentary, or derivative works, can enhance the overall popularity and recognition of copyrighted property by introducing new audiences or markets. In instances of this nature, the use has the potential to augment the financial prospects or cultural importance of the initial creation, thereby conforming to the fundamental objectives of copyright legislation in advancing knowledge and culture. In general, the fourth principle of Fair Use emphasises the significance of achieving a harmonious equilibrium between safeguarding the rights of copyright holders and advancing crucial societal concerns such as information accessibility, freedom of speech, and artistic innovation. Copyright law is designed to protect the economic interests of those who possess copyrights. However, it also acknowledges the wider societal advantages that arise from the distribution, alteration, and use of copyrighted content. Courts endeavour to evaluate the influence of the utilisation on the prospective market or worth of the copyrighted work in order to guarantee that Fair Use advances the general well-being of society while upholding the rights of copyright holders.
In summary, the development and tenets of Fair Use have influenced a malleable and versatile concept that functions as a fundamental exception to copyright legislation. Courts strive to strike a balance between the interests of copyright holders and the broader public interest in promoting creativity, innovation, and knowledge dissemination. This is achieved by taking into account various factors such as the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the impact of the use on the potential market. The Fair Use doctrine serves as a crucial mechanism for advancing the advancement of scientific and practical arts, while also upholding the essential tenets of freedom of speech and expression.
Factors Influencing Fair Use Determination
The determination of Fair Use involves a careful assessment of various factors that collectively shape the analysis of whether a particular use of copyrighted material qualifies as fair. These factors, delineated by case law and scholarly analysis, provide a framework for courts to evaluate the fairness of a use under copyright law.[10]
One of the key factors influencing Fair Use determination is the purpose and character of the use. Courts examine whether the use is transformative, meaning it adds something new or alters the original work’s expression in a significant way. Transformative uses, such as criticism, commentary, parody, or news reporting, are more likely to be considered fair. Additionally, courts consider whether the use is commercial or nonprofit in nature. While commercial use does not preclude a finding of Fair Use, nonprofit and educational uses are often favored. Moreover, the extent to which the use adds value to society, such as by promoting creativity, debate, or public discourse, is also taken into account.[11]
The nature of the copyrighted work is another important factor in Fair Use analysis. Creative works, such as novels, music compositions, or movies, typically receive stronger copyright protection due to their originality and expressive nature. In contrast, factual or informational works, such as news reports or scientific data, may allow broader Fair Use. Courts recognize the importance of access to factual information for public discourse, education, and the advancement of knowledge.Courts also consider the amount and substantiality of the portion used relative to the copyrighted work as a whole. While the use of an entire work does not automatically preclude a finding of Fair Use, courts assess the quantity and quality of the portion used. Using small portions, such as quotes, excerpts, or samples, may still be Fair Use if it is necessary to achieve the transformative purpose of the use and does not exceed what is reasonably necessary. However, extensive use of the heart of the work or the most significant parts may weigh against a finding of Fair Use.Finally, courts examine the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. They assess whether the new use usurps the market for the original work or creates a new market, positively or negatively impacting the original work’s value. If the use serves as a direct substitute for the original work or diminishes its value in the marketplace, it is less likely to be considered fair. Conversely, if the use creates a new market or adds value to the original work, it may support a finding of Fair Use.Overall, these factors collectively shape the Fair Use analysis, guiding courts in balancing the interests of copyright holders with important public interests in access to information, free expression, and creativity. By carefully considering these factors, courts aim to ensure that Fair Use promotes the overall welfare of society while respecting the rights of copyright owners.[12]
Application of Fair Use in the Digital Realm
Digital Nature of the Work
The incorporation of digital elements in works presents distinct factors that influence the examination of Fair Use, hence influencing the manner in which courts evaluate the relevance of Fair Use safeguards within the digital domain. Here are numerous crucial factors to take into account:Digital works, including many forms such as text, photos, audio, and video, possess the advantage of being readily replicable and disseminated with low exertion and expense in contrast to analogue media. The digital landscape facilitates the expeditious and extensive distribution of material over many platforms and networks, encompassing the internet, social media, and file-sharing websites. The ease with which duplication and distribution can occur gives rise to inquiries regarding the possible ramifications on the market for the original work, as well as the necessity for more robust safeguards against unauthorised replication and dissemination. The manipulability of digital content enables users to engage in editing, remixing, and transforming of works in manners that were previously unattainable with analogue media. The evaluation of whether a given use qualifies as transformative is complicated by the availability of digital manipulation, notwithstanding the importance of transformative applications in Fair Use analysis. In order to ascertain the eligibility for Fair Use protection, courts are tasked with evaluating whether digital modifications provide a substantial amount of novel expression or significance to the original work, or whether they simply reproduce or exploit the original content for commercial purposes. The study of Fair Use in the digital domain is further complicated by the widespread adoption of technical protection mechanisms (TPMs), including digital rights management (DRM) and encryption. TPMs are specifically engineered to regulate the availability of digital content and deter unauthorised replication or dissemination. Nevertheless, they may also impose limitations on lawful Fair Use endeavours, such as duplicating for the purpose of criticism, commentary, or educational endeavours. Courts may be required to evaluate the potential effects of Technology Protection Measures (TPMs) on users’ capacity to exercise their Fair Use rights, as well as the justifiability of evading TPMs under specific situations. The use of digital formats has several prospects for the preservation and retrieval of cultural assets, historical records, and other significant artistic creations. The digitization and accessibility of a diverse array of resources for study, teaching, and public enjoyment are significantly facilitated by digital archives, libraries, and museums. In this particular context, the study of Fair Use necessitates the careful consideration of the competing interests of copyright holders, who seek to regulate access to their works, and the public interest, which aims to save and distribute cultural legacy and information. In brief, the inherent digital characteristics of artistic creations pose both obstacles and prospects for the examination of Fair Use. The advent of digital technology has facilitated enhanced accessibility, distribution, and modification of material. However, it has also prompted inquiries over the extent of Fair Use rights and the imperative to achieve a harmonious equilibrium between the concerns of copyright holders and the general public. Courts must meticulously evaluate these criteria when implementing the Fair Use doctrine in the digital domain to guarantee the continued relevance and efficacy of copyright law in the digital era.[13]
Technological Measures
In the digital domain, technological protection mechanisms (TPMs), such as digital rights management (DRM) or encryption, have considerable importance and have the potential to impact the analysis of Fair Use. The purpose of these methods is to regulate the accessibility and use of digital material, with the objective of deterring unauthorised replication, dissemination, or alteration. Nevertheless, the existence of TPMs gives rise to intricate legal and policy deliberations, specifically about their influence on Fair Use entitlements. Courts may examine whether the use of copyrighted material bypasses copyright protection measures (TPMs) while evaluating Fair Use. The existence of copyright protection measures (TPMs) has the potential to impact the accessibility and usefulness of digital information, which may impede the legal uses that are allowed under the Fair Use doctrine. For example, digital rights management (DRM) systems have the potential to impose limitations on users’ ability to create legal copies for purposes such as criticism, commentary, or educational usage, even in cases when such activities would otherwise be deemed equitable. The primary purpose of TPMs is to protect the copyright holders’ rights by preventing unauthorised access or infringement. However, it is important to acknowledge that TPMs may inadvertently impact users’ Fair Use rights. TPMs can impede access to and use of copyrighted content for legal reasons, therefore restricting people’ capacity to participate in activities safeguarded under Fair Use. This situation gives rise to apprehensions regarding the equilibrium between safeguarding copyright and granting users the entitlement to access and utilise copyrighted materials for activities such as scholarly investigation, educational pursuits, or cultural manifestation. The conflict between TPMs (Technology Protection Measures) and Fair Use highlights the necessity for meticulous examination of the interaction between copyright law and technical advancements in the digital realm. In order to prevent excessive limitations on lawful uses of copyrighted material that are allowed under Fair Use, courts must effectively negotiate the intricacies of copyright protection. Furthermore, governments and stakeholders should investigate methods to achieve a suitable equilibrium between safeguarding copyright and upholding users’ rights in the era of digital technology. This should consider the ever-changing nature of technology and its influence on information accessibility, creativity, and innovation.[14]
Online Platforms and Transformative Uses
The rise of online platforms and the widespread creation of content by users have fundamentally changed the way people utilise digital technology. Online platforms such as social media, video-sharing websites, blogs, and forums provide users unparalleled opportunity to generate, distribute, and engage with information, including works that include copyrighted material. These digital platforms have played a pivotal role in fostering the emergence of novel modes of communication and innovation, therefore erasing the boundaries that traditionally separate the consumption and creation of material. User-generated content frequently encompasses the utilisation of copyrighted information in a manner that entails transformation, wherein users integrate, modify, or adapt preexisting works to produce novel and innovative creations. Transformative usage encompasses the act of imbuing the original work with novel significance, expression, or worth, therefore making a valuable contribution to the depth of cultural conversation and artistic ingenuity. When implementing the Fair Use doctrine in the digital environment, it is imperative for courts to thoroughly evaluate the transformative character of such applications. When assessing the transformative applications of copyrighted material on digital networks, judicial bodies take into account many factors: The courts assess whether the use of a copyrighted work serves a distinct purpose or function in comparison to the original work. Fairness is more likely to be attributed to transformative uses that involve commenting on, criticising, parodying, or otherwise modifying the original work for new expressive objectives.[15] Courts take into account the inherent characteristics of the copyrighted work, encompassing its creative or factual attributes. Creative works are often granted more robust copyright protection, however the use of factual or informational works for transformative purposes may be more inclined to meet the criteria for fairness. Courts evaluate whether the transformative use has a detrimental effect on the market for the original work or its prospective market worth. In the event that the new work functions as a replacement for the original or compromises its economic feasibility, it might potentially hinder the determination of fair use. In addition, courts may take into account the user’s sincere attempts to adhere to copyright law, such as appropriately acknowledging the original creator or obtaining permission for the use of copyrighted content when appropriate. In general, the widespread availability of online platforms has broadened the potential for the innovative use of protected content, hence cultivating a vibrant and interactive digital environment. The judiciary plays a vital role in reconciling the concerns of copyright owners with the fundamental tenets of unrestricted speech, artistic ingenuity, and advancement in the era of digital technology. Through a meticulous examination of the transformative characteristics inherent in user-generated material and its ramifications on the original works and the marketplace, judicial bodies can effectively safeguard the perpetuation of the Fair Use doctrine, therefore fostering the advancement of knowledge and culture within the digital domain.
Fair Use in a Global Context
The examination of Fair Use in the digital domain is progressively influenced by international factors and cross-border ramifications as a result of the worldwide reach of the internet. The accessibility, sharing, and dissemination of digital content transcend geographical boundaries, enabling its circulation between states with varying copyright laws and enforcement methods. Consequently, judicial bodies are confronted with the challenge of determining the global relevance of Fair Use principles and manoeuvring through intricate legal frameworks that are shaped by international copyright treaties and accords. One of the primary obstacles encountered in the global implementation of Fair Use is to the absence of uniformity in copyright legislation across many nations. Certain legal regimes possess comprehensive Fair Use or fair dealing rules that offer adaptable exemptions to copyright infringement, whilst others may adopt more limited exceptions or depend on particular legislative restrictions and exceptions. The presence of many legal frameworks can lead to ambiguity and intricacy for those involved in content creation, users, and rights holders inside the digital realm. Furthermore, the widespread use of online platforms and digital technology has increased the spread of copyrighted content across borders, which has led to concerns regarding jurisdictional matters and the implementation of copyright law across national borders. In situations involving international Fair Use conflicts, courts may have difficulties in ascertaining the relevant legislation and jurisdiction, especially when digital information is viewed or shared across numerous nations.[16] Fair Use analysis is influenced by international copyright treaties and agreements, such as the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement. These treaties define basic levels of protection and offer procedures for enforcing copyright rights across borders. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that these accords frequently provide for the possibility of national governments enacting local exemptions and restrictions on copyright infringement, resulting in divergent Fair Use policies across different countries. When dealing with these intricate matters, courts must carefully manage the trade-off between facilitating the unrestricted dissemination of information, fostering innovation, and facilitating cultural interchange over the internet, all while honouring the rights of copyright owners and adhering to the tenets of intellectual property legislation. Effective cooperation and synchronisation among nations, interested parties, and global institutions are crucial in tackling the difficulties presented by the worldwide scope of digital copyright and guaranteeing an equitable and impartial approach to Fair Use on a global scale.
In the digital domain, the implementation of Fair Use necessitates meticulous examination of the distinct obstacles presented by digital content and online platforms. Although the core tenets of Fair Use continue to have significance, it is imperative for courts to modify their examination in order to accommodate the dynamic characteristics of digital technology and its influence on the production, distribution, and use of intellectual content. The Fair Use doctrine may maintain its crucial role in promoting creativity, innovation, and free expression in the digital era by effectively managing the rights of copyright holders and the interests of users and the public.
Legal Defenses and Cases Demonstrating Fair Use
The use of Fair Use principles by courts in various settings is shown by legal defences and cases, which serve to strike a balance between the rights of copyright holders and the promotion of free expression, creativity, and innovation. The use of the Fair Use concept is shown by several significant legal defences and prominent cases. Parodies sometimes entail the use of copyrighted content in a transformative manner, serving as a means to remark on or critique the original work. Parodies provide fresh significance and expression by replicating or reinterpreting aspects of the original piece in a comical or sarcastic fashion. The recognition by courts of the significant social and cultural roles served by parodies lies in their ability to offer criticism on popular culture and societal standards.[17] The Fair Use doctrine frequently deems nonprofit and educational uses as fair since they contribute to public knowledge, research, and education. Fair Use defences have been affirmed by courts in relation to several activities, including teaching, scholarship, research, and nonprofit advocacy. These courts acknowledge the public interest that is served by permitting restricted use of copyrighted content within these specific domains. The principle of Fair Use can be used in the context of news reporting, commentary, and criticism, specifically where the utilisation of copyrighted content serves the public interest through the provision of factual information or the facilitation of public discussion. The judiciary has acknowledged the significance of safeguarding press freedom and the public’s entitlement to get information, even in cases where such utilisation involves copyrighted material.
- Tips Industries Ltd. v. Wynk Music Ltd. (2020):
The Bombay High Court deliberated on whether Wynk Music Ltd., a digital music streaming service, had committed copyright infringement by using copyrighted tunes. The proprietor of the copyrighted music, Tips Industries Ltd., has made a claim that Wynk Music’s streaming service has infringed upon its exclusive rights as stipulated by the Copyright Act. Nevertheless, the Bombay High Court determined that Wynk Music’s utilisation of the songs was included by Section 52(1)(o) of the Copyright Act. This particular provision permits the dissemination of copyrighted works to the general public with the intention of reporting contemporary occurrences. Wynk Music’s streaming service was determined by the Court to offer customers access to songs as a component of a news reporting service, allowing them to listen to and remain updated on current events and advancements in the music business. This particular case exemplifies the manner in which Indian courts interpret and implement the exceptions to copyright infringement as outlined in Section 52 of the Copyright Act. These exceptions, akin to Fair Use principles, aim to strike a balance between the rights of copyright holders and the public’s interest in accessing information and cultural expression.[18]
- ICC Development (International) Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises (2002):
The Delhi High Court deliberated on whether the replication of cricket match scorecards and statistics amounted to copyright violation in this significant legal matter. The copyright holder of the scorecards and statistics, ICC Development (International) Ltd., has claimed that Arvee Enterprises’ unauthorised distribution of the material infringes against its exclusive rights as protected by the Copyright Act. The use of cricket match scorecards and statistics by Arvee Enterprises was determined by the Delhi High Court to be within the purview of Section 52(1)(a)(i) of the Copyright Act. This particular section permits the reproduction of copyrighted works for private or personal purposes. The Court determined that the release of the material by Arvee Enterprises was initially meant for private dissemination among cricket lovers, and thus did not amount to commercial exploitation or violation of ICC Development’s copyright. This case exemplifies the manner in which Indian courts interpret and implement the exceptions to copyright infringement as outlined in Section 52 of the Copyright Act. These courts consider various factors, including the purpose and nature of the use, the characteristics of the copyrighted work, and the potential impact on the market for the original work. [19] 3. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. (2012):
In this particular instance, the Delhi High Court deliberated upon the question of whether the act of Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. (Radio City) transmitting sound recordings that were protected by copyright constituted an infringement of copyright. T-Series, the proprietor of the copyrighted sound recordings, claimed that Radio City’s unauthorised airing of the songs infringed upon its exclusive rights as stipulated by the Copyright Act. According to the Delhi High Court, Radio City’s transmission of the sound recordings was considered to be within the boundaries of Section 52(1)(p) of the Copyright Act. This section permits a broadcasting organisation to transmit or perform copyrighted works, albeit with specific restrictions and limits. The Court determined that Radio City’s transmission of the music adhered to the specified licence requirements and did not amount to copyright violation. This particular case serves as an illustration of the implementation of statutory licencing provisions within the framework of Indian copyright law. These provisions establish exemptions from copyright infringement for certain instances of copyrighted works utilised by broadcasting entities. The interpretation provided by the Court on Section 52(1)(p) highlights the significance of striking a balance between the rights of copyright holders and the public’s interest in obtaining cultural and creative content via broadcasting platforms.
- R.G. Anand v. Delux Films (1978):
The Supreme Court of India deliberated on the issue of whether the film adaptation of a literary work constituted copyright infringement or Fair Use in this significant legal case. According to R.G. Anand, the creator of the theatrical production “Hum Hindustani,” the film adaptation of the play entitled “New Delhi” by Delux Films is claimed to have infringed upon his exclusive rights as stipulated by the Copyright Act. Delux Films’ version of the play was deemed a valid application of Fair Use by the Supreme Court, since it qualified as a genuine adaptation for the screen. The Court highlighted the profound impact of the adaptation, which entailed significant modifications to the storyline, characters, and conversation to align with the cinematic medium. Furthermore, the Court acknowledged the societal benefit of promoting imaginative modifications of literary works for other artistic platforms. This case set a significant legal precedent for the implementation of Fair Use principles in India, emphasising the necessity of striking a balance between the rights of copyright holders and the public’s interest in artistic expression and cultural advancement.[20]
- Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. (2021):
The legal case of Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. revolved around the use of specific Java application programming interfaces (APIs) by Google inside their Android operating system. Oracle, the proprietor of the application programming interfaces (APIs), contended that Google’s use amounted to copyright violation and pursued compensation for the unauthorised utilisation of its intellectual content. Nevertheless, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered a verdict in favour of Google, determining that their use of the APIs amounted to Fair Use in accordance with copyright legislation. The Court placed significant emphasis on the transformative objective of Google’s use, highlighting its adaptation of the APIs to suit a distinct context and purpose compared to their original design. The use of APIs by Google has played a pivotal role in fostering interoperability and promoting innovation within the software industry. This has enabled developers to construct novel apps and services specifically tailored for the Android platform. Moreover, the Court took into account the wider societal concern for fostering innovation and competition within the software sector. The Court acknowledged the significance of striking a balance between the rights of copyright owners and the promotion of innovation, technical progress, and interoperability by permitting Fair Use for transformative purposes. The use of APIs by Google was determined to be beneficial to the general public since it promoted innovation and competition, thereby endorsing the Fair Use doctrine as a crucial principle in copyright law.[21]
These examples exemplify the use of Fair Use principles by courts in various situations, taking into account considerations such as the intention and nature of the use, the characteristics of the copyrighted work, the quantity and significance of the portion utilised, and the impact on the potential market for the original work. Courts offer advice for future Fair Use rulings and contribute to the advancement of copyright law in the digital era via the analysis of these cases.
[1]Basheer, S., “Intellectual Property Law in India”,15.
[2]Kailasam, K.C., “Copyright Law in India” 45-46.
[3]United States Copyright Act of 1976.
[4]European Union Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (2019/790).
[5]Sundara Rajan, M., “Fair Use in Copyright Law” (Oxford University Press, 2016).
[6]Indian Copyright Act, 1957.
[7]Basheer, Shamnad. “Intellectual Property Law in India.”
[8]Fisher, William W. “Promises to Keep: Technology, Law, and the Future of Entertainment.”
[9]Ginsburg, Jane C. “Foundations of Intellectual Property.”
[10]Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994).
[11]Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1183 (2021).
[12]Blanch v. Koons, 467 F.3d 244 (2d Cir. 2006).
[13]Tips Industries Ltd. v. Wynk Music Ltd., 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 3103
[14]Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2007): Case involving Fair Use in the context of thumbnail images displayed in search engine results.
[15]Tips Industries Ltd. v. Wynk Music Ltd., 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 3103: Indian case illustrating Fair Use principles in the context of digital music streaming services.
[16]Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd., 448 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 2006).
[17]Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd., 448 F.3d 605 (2d Cir. 2006): Case discussing Fair Use in the context of reproducing concert posters in a book about the Grateful Dead.
[18]Tips Industries Ltd. v. Wynk Music Ltd., 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 3103.
[19]ICC Development (International) Ltd. v. Arvee Enterprises, (2002) 5 SCC 560.
[20]R.G. Anand v. Delux Films, AIR 1978 SC 1613 (India).
[21]Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., 141 S. Ct. 1183 (2021).