Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(a) in any cinematograph film if a substantial part of the film is an infringement of the copyright in any other work;

(b) in any sound recording made in respect of a literary, dramatic or musical work, if in making the sound recording, copyright in such work has been infringed.

(4) The copyright in a cinematograph film or a sound recording shall not affect the separate copyright in any work in respect of which or a substantial part of which, the film, or as the case may be, the sound recording is made.

On the other hand, on behalf of the defendants, it is contended that the plaint discloses no cause of action and/or in any event no cause of action has accrued to the plaintiffs to allege any infringement of the copyright in the plaintiffs' cinematographic film. Section 14(d) of the Act, it is contended, specifies only three categories of acts of which the owner of the copyright in a cinematographic film has exclusive right. Comparison is sought to be made within Section 14(e) where only three categories of exclusive right are given to an owner of the copyright in a sound recording. Reliance is placed on Section 2(f) which defines a cinematographic film. It is then contended that in contrast to Section 14(d) and (e) are Section 14(a), (b) and (c), which speak of exclusive rights to the owner of copyright in a literary, dramatic or musical work. These Sections, it is contended, give an exclusive right to the owner to reproduce the work in any material form. This is specifically and significantly absent in relation to a cinematographic film and sound recording and the exclusive right conferred by the latter sections is to copy the recording of that particular film/sound. The position becomes clear, it is contended; if the definition of infringing copy in relation to literary, dramatic or artistic work is contrasted with the definition of infringing copy in relation to cinematographic film and sound recording. Contrasting the two, in the former an infringing copy is the reproduction of the original copyrighted literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work. In the latter case, infringing copy is a copy of the film made from the copyrighted film or recording embodying the same sound recording from the copyrighted sound recording. The subsequent film/sound recording is not an infringing copy if it is not copied or made from the same, earlier recording.

The expression 'to make a copy of the film' would mean to make a physical copy of the film itself and not an another film which merely resembles the film.

The making of another film is not included under Section 14(d)(i) and such other film, even though it resembles completely the copyrighted film, does not fall within the expression 'to make a copy of the film'. Therefore, if the film has been filmed or shot separately by a person and it resembles the earlier film, the subsequent film is not a copy of the first film and, therefore, does not amount to infringement of whole of the copyright of the first film. The position in the case of literary, dramatic or artistic work seems to be different. A narrow copyright protection is accorded to a film/sound recordings than for literary, dramatic or artistic work. The reason perhaps could be that they have to be original to satisfy the test of copyrightability, whereas the requirement of originality is absent for claiming copyright in cinematograph films/sound recordings.

57. The first question that arises for consideration of this court is whether under the provisions of Copyrights Act 1957, there is a separate copyright for cinematograph film and literary work and what is the effect thereof on the subject matter of this dispute.

58. On perusal of the definition of "author" under Section 2(d) of the said Act, it reveals that in relation to a literary or dramatic work, the author of the work is the author in respect thereof. In relation to cinematograph, the owner of the film at the time of its completion is author thereof. The definition of cinematograph film indicates that it includes any work produced by any process analogous to cinematography. Definition of 'work' indicates that literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work is different than a cinematograph film. Section 13 makes it clear that there is a separate copyright in respect of original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works and in respect of cinematograph film. On reading of Section 14(1)(a) and (d) of the said Act, it makes clear that acts for copyrights in literary work and cinematograph film are different. On conjoint reading of the definition of 'author' and 'work' with Section 13 and 14 of the said Act, it clear that there is separate copyright in respect of the literary work and .. 67 .. ARBP-15/13 also in respect of cinematograph film. I am also supported by the view taken by this Court on this issue in case of Star India Pvt. Ltd. (supra). This court in the said judgment has held that position in the case of literary, dramatic or artistic work seems to be different. A narrow copyright protection is accorded to a film/sound recordings than for literary, dramatic or artistic work. In my view, there can be separate author for each work as defined under the provisions of said Copyrights Act.