Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: emasculation in Novex Communications Private Limited vs Kpercept Limited on 24 January, 2024Matching Fragments
24. Mr. Khambata has submitted that Owner's right under Section 30 cannot be curtailed by Section 33 (1) of the Act. He has submitted that Defendants have alleged that "no person" in Section 33(1) includes an "owner" of copyright and therefore even an owner of copyright cannot commence or carry on the business of granting copyright licenses. He has submitted that such an interpretation is ex facie incorrect because :
i) If the interpretation as sought to be canvassed by the Defendant is accepted, then Section 33(1) completely takes away the right granted by Section 30 of the Act. In such a case, Section 33(1) would effectively emasculate Section 30;
ii) Further, if Defendant's interpretation is accepted then a section in a chapter dealing with copyright varsha 24 of 87 Varsha COMP-264-2022 AND COMP-363-2019 final.doc societies would completely subordinate and emasculate the right of an owner under Section 30, a section which falls in a different Chapter dealing with licensing. If Parliament had intended to take away any part of the owner's right under Section 30 (even by subjecting it to the compulsory agency of a registered copyright society) then an express amendment to Section 30 would have been essential.
148. I am of the considered view that Section 33 (1) of the Act cannot curtail the power of the owner to grant any interest in the copyright by license under Section 30 of the Act. This provision has not at all being denuded by the 1994 Amendment, which has brought in Chapter VII in the Act.
149. I do not find any merit in the interpretation placed by the Defendant that "no person" in Section 33(1) includes an "owner" of copyright and therefore even an "owner" of copyright cannot commence or carry on the business of granting copyright licenses. If such interpretation is accepted, Section 33(1) of the Act would take way the power of owner and / or the right of the owner to grant any interest in the copyright by license. This would emasculate right of the owner under Section 30. This was not contemplated by the Parliament by way of the 1994 Amendment Act. In my view, Chapter VII which deals with copyright society is operating in a different field than that of Chapter VI which is the source for granting of licenses by the owner of copyright.