In the modern digital age, copyright infringement has become rampant, posing significant challenges to copyright owners. To address this issue, copyright laws, including those in India, offer remedies for copyright infringement.
However, assessing the effectiveness of these remedies requires a thorough examination of their implementation, challenges, and potential solutions.
Civil remedies like injunctions and criminal remedies like imprisonment are available to copyright owners in India.
Challenges include difficulty proving infringement due to complex issues of originality and fair use and enforcement difficulties stemming from limited resources and technological advancements.
Challenges also arise in addressing online infringement, including intermediary liability issues and safe harbour provisions. Solutions may involve legal reforms, technological advancements, and international cooperation to strengthen evidence gathering, monitor infringement, and facilitate cross-border enforcement efforts.
Copyright Infringement
Copyright infringement refers to the unauthorised use, reproduction, distribution, or exploitation of a copyrighted work without obtaining proper permission from the copyright owner. In other words, it violates the exclusive rights granted to the copyright owner under copyright law.
These exclusive rights typically include the right to reproduce, distribute, publicly perform, publicly display, and create derivative works based on the original work.
Copyright infringement can occur in various forms, such as:
1. Reproducing or plagiarizing a copyrighted work without authorisation, such as making copies of a book, film, music recording, artwork, or other copyrighted material.
2. Distributing copyrighted works without proper authorisation, such as selling, distributing, or sharing copyrighted materials, including through digital means like file sharing or online platforms.
3. Publicly performing or displaying a copyrighted work without proper authorisation, such as performing a play, music, or other performance in public or displaying copyrighted artwork or photographs in a public setting.
4. Creating derivative works without proper authorisation, such as creating adaptations, translations, or other modifications of a copyrighted work without obtaining permission from the original copyright owner.
5. Using copyrighted material in a commercial context without proper authorisation, such as using copyrighted images, logos, or trademarks for commercial purposes without obtaining permission from the copyright owner.
Copyright infringement is generally a violation of the copyright owner’s exclusive rights. It can result in legal consequences, including civil lawsuits, damages, injunctions, other remedies, and potential criminal penalties in some cases.
There are certain exceptions and limitations to copyright infringement, such as fair use or fair dealing provisions that allow for limited and specific uses of copyrighted material for purposes such as education, criticism, news reporting, and research, among others, depending on the applicable copyright laws in a particular jurisdiction.
Remedies for Infringement of Copyright
The three types of remedies for copyright infringement under the Indian Copyright Act of 1957 are civil remedies, criminal remedies, and administrative remedies. Here’s more about them.
Civil Remedies
The Indian Copyright Act of 1957 is a comprehensive legislation providing various civil remedies for copyright infringement. Copyright infringement occurs when someone uses or copies an original work protected by copyright without the copyright owner’s permission.
Civil remedies for copyright infringement are legal actions the copyright owner can take against the infringer to defend their rights and obtain compensation for damages.
The civil remedies available for copyright infringement in India include injunctions, damages, claiming an account of profit, delivery of infringing copies, and statutory damages. Each of these remedies is explained in more detail below.
1. Injunctions: An injunction is a court order prohibiting the infringer from continuing to infringe the copyright. It is a preventive measure that the copyright owner can obtain to prevent further harm. An injunction can be a temporary or permanent order.
A temporary injunction is issued to provide immediate relief, while a permanent injunction is issued after a full trial on the case’s merits. An injunction is a common remedy for copyright infringement, and it can be obtained quickly if the copyright owner can show that they are likely to suffer irreparable harm if the infringement continues.
In copyright infringement under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, two civil remedies are available to the copyright holder: an interlocutory injunction and a Mareva injunction.
An interlocutory injunction is a type of temporary injunction that the court grants before the final judgment in the case. It is usually granted to preserve the status quo, prevent the defendant from further infringing on the copyright, and protect the rights of the copyright holder.
To obtain an interlocutory injunction, the copyright holder must show that there is a prima facie infringement case, that they would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted, and that the balance of convenience is in their favour.
A Mareva injunction, on the other hand, is a type of freezing order granted by the court to prevent the defendant from disposing of their assets or removing them from the jurisdiction of the court.
This type of injunction is beneficial in cases where the defendant is likely to dispose of their assets to avoid paying damages or to frustrate the efforts of the copyright holder to recover damages.
To obtain a Mareva injunction, the copyright holder must show that there is a good arguable case of infringement, a real risk of dissipation of assets by the defendant and that the balance of convenience is in their favour.
It is important to note that both interlocutory and Mareva injunctions are temporary and are only granted before the final judgment of the case. The injunction is lifted or made permanent once the final judgment is passed, depending on the case outcome.
Interlocutory and Mareva injunctions are essential civil remedies available to copyright holders in cases of copyright infringement under the Indian Copyright Act 1957.
These remedies help to protect the rights of the copyright holder and prevent the defendant from further infringing on their copyright. Copyright holders need to seek the advice of a qualified lawyer to determine whether they are eligible to obtain these remedies and how to get them.
2. Damages: Damages are a monetary award that the copyright owner can recover from the infringer for the losses suffered due to the infringement. The damages can be actual or statutory. Actual damages are the losses suffered by the copyright owner due to the infringement, while the statute fixes statutory damages and are not dependent on the losses suffered.
The Indian Copyright Act provides for both actual and statutory damages. The copyright owner can claim either actual or statutory damages, but not both. The court will award damages based on the evidence presented by the copyright owner.
3. Account of profits: An account of profits is a remedy that allows the copyright owner to recover the profits earned by the infringer due to the infringement. It is a remedy that is available in addition to damages.
The copyright owner can claim an account of profits if they can show that the infringer has made a profit by using the copyrighted work without permission. An account of profits is an equitable remedy, and the court will award it based on the facts of the case.
4. Delivery of infringing copies: The copyright owner can obtain an order from the court requiring the infringer to deliver all infringing copies of the copyrighted work to the copyright owner.
This remedy is available to prevent the further distribution of the infringing copies and to ensure that the infringer cannot profit from the infringement.
5. Statutory damages: Statutory damages are fixed damages that the copyright owner can claim without proving actual damages suffered. The Indian Copyright Act provides for statutory damages in some instances, such as in the case of infringement of sound recordings or cinematograph films. The amount of statutory damages is fixed by the statute and is determined by the court based on the facts of the case.
Criminal Remedies
We know that ‘actus reus’ paired with ‘mens rea’ remains the fundamental deciding factor for a criminal offence. The Copyright Act of 1957 not only addresses various criminal acts in the field of copyright but also lays out specific remedies for such criminal acts.
It is important to note that criminal remedies are distinct from others, just like civil remedies. Their unique and independent nature enables the law to deal with the criminal aspect of the situation adequately while enabling criminal remedies to be used alongside civil remedies.
The motive behind using criminal and civil remedies simultaneously is to prevent any further violation of the law in either of the areas during the proceedings. This also means that the dismissal of a criminal complaint won’t be justified solely because the nature of the suit is civil.
When we evaluate the practicality of criminal remedies, we see that criminal cases are generally disposed of faster than civil cases because of their seriousness, as they are closely related to essential core elements forming a society, such as integrity and security. Hence, criminal remedies stand to be more influential than civil remedies.
The provisions of the Act dealing with criminal remedies can be found in chapters 13 and 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Chapter 13 of the Act covers sections 63 to 70, which specify offences, and Chapter 14 of the Act covers sections 71 to 73, which specify appeals.
The offences defined under Chapter 13 include criminal remedies with the criminal offences, but chapter 14 doesn’t talk about criminal remedies specifically; instead, we know that appeal and remedy are semantically related, and when the powers are misused more often than not, the only remedy left is an appeal. After this, prominent sections detailing the available criminal remedies are discussed briefly.
1. Section 63 (Infringement of copyright or any other right): Any person who knowingly infringes or abets to infringe, either a copyrighted work or any other right given by the section (excluding Section 53A), shall be punished with imprisonment from anywhere between 6 months to 3 years, along with a fine from anywhere between Rs. 50000 to Rs. 2 lakhs.
If the infringement occurred not for gain in the course of trade or business, the court may impose a lesser fine than the minimum amount or term of imprisonment and mention adequate reasons for doing so in the judgment.
2. Section 63A (The enhanced penalty for second and subsequent convictions): The person facing a second time or subsequent conviction of violating section 63 shall be punished with imprisonment from anywhere between 1 year to 3 years, along with a fine from anywhere between Rs. 1 lakh to Rs. 2 lakhs.
If the infringement occurred not for gain in the course of trade or business, the court may impose a lesser fine than the minimum amount or term of imprisonment and mention adequate reasons for doing so in the judgment.
3. Section 63B (Knowing use of an infringing copy of a computer programme): Any person found guilty of the offence shall be imprisoned for anywhere between 7 days to 3 years, along with a fine between Rs. fifty thousand to Rs. 2 lakhs.
Provided that if the computer program used is not for gain in the course of trade or business, the court may impose a lesser fine than the minimum amount and may not impose any sentence of imprisonment. Still, the court must mention adequate reasons for doing so in the judgment.
4. Section 64(2): In furtherance of police rightfully seizing infringing copies, any person who has an interest in the copies or plates seized under Section 64(1), within 15 days of seizure, has to file an application with the Magistrate, requesting restoration of such copies or plates. The magistrate shall pass an adequate order after an appropriate inquiry.
5. Section 65 (Possession of Plates for production of Infringing copy): If any person knowingly does so, he will be punished with imprisonment, which may extend up to 2 years, and a fine.
6. Section 65A (Protection of technological measures): If any person illegally avoids any effective technological measure that is applied to protect rights given under the Act, the person shall be liable for imprisonment, which may extend up to 2 years, and a fine excluding the necessary acts mentioned.
7. Section 65B (Protection of Rights Management Information): Any act of removal, alteration, or distribution of rights management information without authority shall be punished with imprisonment, which may extend up to 2 years, and a fine. Provided that the owner of the tempered work may also use civil remedies provided under chapter 12.
8. Section 67 (Punishment for making false entries): Any person who makes or causes false entries to be made in the copyright register, prescribed by the Act, shall be punished with imprisonment up to 1 year, a fine, or both.
9. Section 68 (Penalty for making false statements to deceive or influence any officer or authority): Any person making a false statement or representing the same knowing to be false to an authority or an officer about the execution of a provision of this Act or any omission in relation to this Act shall be punished with imprisonment up to 1 year, or fine, or both.
10. Section 68A (Penalty for contravention of section 52A): Any person publishing an audio recording or a video recording violating section 52A of this Act, shall be punished with imprisonment, which may extend up to 3 years, and a fine.
11. Section 71 (Appeal against specific orders of Magistrate): For an order passed under section 64(2) or section 66, any aggrieved person can appeal to the appropriate court within 30 days from the passing of the order, and the appellate court must put a stay on the execution of that order until the disposal of the appeal.
12. Section 64(1) states the power of the police to seize infringing copies; section 69 states offences by companies; section 70 states cognisance of offences; section 72 states appeal against the registrar of copyrights and appellate board; and section 73 states procedure for appeals. This might not be directly related to the criminal remedies but may affect the process in some manner.
Administrative Remedies
Administrative remedies focus on the managerial aspects, and in the field of copyright, they mean the proper appropriation of work by its owner.
Section 53 of the Act talks about the importation of infringing copies. As per the section, any owner of the work or their authorised agent may provide a written notice to the designated Commissioner of Customs or any other authorised officer by CBEC, stating the rightful ownership with proof attached and stating the details of the arrival of the infringed work, further requesting to treat the work as prohibited.
Then, the commissioner, after scrutinising the evidence, may treat the infringed goods as prohibited if he finds the copies to be infringed at the expense of the owner; if not, then the owner is to compensate the importer as well.
Upon detaining the infringed goods, the officer must inform the owner and importer within 48 hours of the detention of the goods. Lastly, the owner has to get a court order regarding temporary or permanent jurisdiction over the disposal of the goods within 14 days of the detention. Otherwise, the goods will no longer be treated as prohibited and will be released.
This way, the Copyright Act, 1957, provides a speedy and compelling way to restrict the trade of infringed goods over Indian borders, ultimately benefiting the owners of the work and maintaining the integrity of copyright as a key concept for modern trade.
Effectiveness of Remedies Provided Under the Indian Copyright Law
The copyright infringement remedies in India are generally effective, although there are some challenges in their implementation. The Copyright Act of India, amended in 2012, provides civil and criminal remedies for copyright infringement. These remedies are primarily in compliance with the TRIPS Agreement, which sets international standards for copyright protection.
One of India’s most effective remedies for copyright infringement are the criminal remedies. Criminal remedies are generally faster and more expeditious than civil remedies. They can be used to stop further infringement and punish the infringer.
Mens rea, or knowledge of the infringement, is an essential ingredient of the offence, which makes it easier to prove in court. The punishment for copyright infringement can include imprisonment and fines, which serve as a strong deterrent for potential infringers.
Civil remedies in India include injunctions, damages, and accounts of profits. Injunctions can be granted to prevent further infringement, and damages and accounts of profits can be awarded to compensate the copyright owner for the loss suffered due to the infringement. However, civil remedies can be slow and expensive, which may discourage some copyright owners from pursuing them.
One of the main challenges in implementing copyright infringement remedies in India is the lack of awareness among the general public about copyright law.
Many people are unaware that using copyrighted works without permission is illegal and can result in legal action. As a result, copyright infringement is still prevalent in some sectors of the Indian economy, such as the film and music industries.
Another challenge is the backlog of cases in Indian courts, which can delay the resolution of copyright infringement disputes. The lack of specialised intellectual property courts makes enforcing copyright laws more difficult.
Overall, while there are some challenges in implementing copyright infringement remedies in India, the legal framework provides effective options for copyright owners to protect their works. Using criminal remedies and increased awareness about copyright law can help further strengthen these remedies’ effectiveness in the future.
Effectiveness of Remedies in the Global Arena
Copyright infringement is a global problem, and different countries have legal systems to address it. In recent years, the international community has made significant efforts to standardise its approach to copyright infringement and establish a set of global remedies.
The most notable effort in this regard is the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, which sets out minimum standards for protecting and enforcing intellectual property rights, including copyright.
Under the TRIPS Agreement, member countries must provide adequate legal remedies for civil and criminal copyright infringement. These remedies include injunctive relief, damages, and criminal sanctions. The agreement also requires member countries to provide provisional measures to prevent copyright infringement and allow for the destruction of infringing goods.
Overall, the effectiveness of copyright infringement remedies in the global arena varies widely depending on the legal system of each country. While many countries have enacted strong laws and regulations to protect copyright, others are yet to establish a comprehensive legal framework or have inadequate enforcement mechanisms.
Copyright owners’ most significant challenge is enforcing their rights across borders. In today’s digital age, it is easy for infringers to operate from remote locations and distribute their infringing content globally. This makes it difficult for copyright owners to identify and take action against infringers in different countries.
To address this issue, many countries have established bilateral or multilateral agreements to improve cross-border copyright enforcement. For example, the United States has entered into free trade agreements with several countries that require them to adopt strong copyright protection and enforcement measures.
Similarly, the European Union has implemented the Directive on the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, which establishes minimum standards for enforcing intellectual property rights, including copyright, across all EU member states.
In conclusion, the effectiveness of copyright infringement remedies in the global arena depends on each country’s legal system’s strength and ability to enforce copyright laws. The TRIPS Agreement and other international agreements have significantly progressed towards standardising global remedies. However, there is still a long way to go in ensuring consistent and effective copyright enforcement across borders.
Conclusion
Copyright law provides remedies to address infringement and protect authors’ rights, including injunctions and compensation. However, challenges posed by the internet and international enforcement raise doubts about the sufficiency of existing provisions.
International treaties like TRIPS aim to ensure global recognition and enforcement of intellectual property rights but may fall short in addressing jurisdictional issues and enforcement against non-compliant countries.
In countries like India, balancing copyright protection with socio-economic considerations is crucial, with a need to effectively implement existing remedies while considering genuine exceptions to intellectual property rights. Monitoring the evolution of copyright protection laws will be essential to address these challenges effectively in the future.
Read Next: Whirlpool of India Ltd. vs Videocon Industries Ltd. – Case Explained
- What Is Misappropriation of Trade Secrets and Its Defences? - 15th May 2024
- 7 Important Types of Mediation Briefly Defined - 14th May 2024
- Whirlpool India vs Videocon Industries – Case Explained - 13th May 2024
