ISSUES IN DIGITAL COPYRIGHT

Advertisements

Spread the love

Post Views: 652

This article is written by Deepanshi Tiwari of 7^th Semester of Shri Ramswaroop Memorial University

ABSTRACT

The rapid advancements in digital technology have revolutionized the way content is created, shared, and consumed, presenting both opportunities and challenges for copyright protection. This article delves into the multifaceted issues surrounding digital copyrights, shedding light on the complex landscape of copyright infringement, enforcement challenges, fair use controversies, and the role of Digital Rights Management (DRM) in safeguarding intellectual property.

The rise of online piracy platforms has significantly impacted copyright holders, necessitating a deeper understanding of safe harbour provisions within the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Moreover, technological advancements, such as digital watermarking and AI-powered monitoring solutions, offer potential remedies but also raise concerns about privacy and accuracy.

International treaties play a crucial role in harmonizing copyright laws across borders, yet jurisdictional complexities persist in the globalized digital landscape. The article explores the need for copyright reform, advocating for a delicate balance between protecting creators’ rights and preserving user freedoms.

In addition to examining the challenges, this article also explores alternative licensing models like Creative Commons, which encourage sharing while respecting copyright integrity. The importance of copyright education and public awareness campaigns is emphasized, aiming to dispel myths and foster responsible content consumption.

Finally, the article looks ahead to emerging technologies such as AI, blockchain, and virtual reality, which hold promise in revolutionizing copyright protection, but also introduce new complexities.

In summary, this comprehensive analysis illuminates the pressing issues in digital copyrights, providing valuable insights for policymakers, content creators, and digital users alike. Only through a collaborative effort can the digital era strike the right balance between fostering innovation and safeguarding the rights of creative minds.

Keywords:

Digital Copyrights, Copyright Infringement, Enforcement Challenges, Fair Use, Digital Rights Management, Online Piracy, Safe Harbour Provisions, Technological Challenges, International Copyright Treaties, Copyright Reform, Creative Commons, Copyright Education, Emerging Technologies, Intellectual Property, Content Protection

INTRODUCTION

In the era of rapid technological advancements and the pervasive influence of the internet, digital copyright has emerged as a critical and multifaceted concern. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, creators, users, and policymakers grapple with an array of complex issues related to protecting intellectual property in the online realm. This topic delves into the challenges, controversies, and legal complexities surrounding digital copyright, exploring the implications for content creators, consumers, and the global digital community. From issues of piracy and infringement to the ever-changing nature of technological innovation, understanding the intricacies of digital copyright is crucial in shaping a fair and sustainable digital environment. This article aims to shed light on the key issues and debates in digital copyright, offering insights into the ongoing efforts to strike a balance between creativity, access to knowledge, and the preservation of artistic integrity in the digital age.

Copyright is grounded in an economic philosophy that prohibits individuals from profiting off the creative works of others. The continuous advancement of technology continually broadens the reach and subject matter of copyright protection. Digital copyright specifically addresses the realm of artistic, literary, musical, and other creative works in the cyberspace domain, necessitating the constant updating of copyright laws to effectively address technological offenses in this domain.

Indian copyright law has often been overshadowed by its English counterpart; however, with the forces of globalization and the growing economic significance of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) in general, and copyright in particular, India has undergone a transformative shift. Over time, the Indian legislature has tailored its own distinct approach, infusing the field of copyright law with its unique colour and essence.

This article predominantly focuses on the legal aspects of digital copyright, examining the myriad challenges and complexities encountered in this sphere. By delving into the intricacies of digital copyright, it seeks to shed light on the evolving landscape of intellectual property protection, the intricacies of cyberspace, and the pertinent issues that arise in this dynamic domain.

TYPES OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT

Infringement of copyright in the cyberspace realm encompasses a range of unauthorized activities that violate the exclusive rights of copyright owners. These violations occur in various forms and mediums, and understanding them is crucial to protect the rights of creators and copyright holders.

One prevalent form of infringement involves downloading and uploading copyrighted material from the internet without appropriate authorization. This process of copying or reproducing material available online without adhering to the stipulated restrictions can lead to offenses.

Another violation arises when multiple programs are compiled to create derivative works, without obtaining the necessary permissions, thus infringing on copyright protection.

Hot-linking is another practice that infringes on copyright rights. It involves displaying images on a website by linking to websites hosting those images, potentially violating the rights of the copyright owners.

Audio-video works are not exempt from infringement either. Copying audio or video files through peer-to-peer file-sharing networks can amount to violations of copyright.

The concept of multimedia is vast and encompasses text, sounds, audio, video, images, graphics, presentations, live videos of speeches, performances, and more. Copyright protection is applicable to various elements of multimedia, making it challenging to safeguard the rights of creators and copyright owners due to the myriad rights available under this domain.

Infringement in multimedia involves copying works without permission, distributing multimedia products for purposes other than education, creating prints of literary or artistic works without prior permission, and dubbing and selling sound recordings without the creator’s authorization.

Software piracy is a significant concern in copyright infringement. Unauthorized copying and distribution of copyrighted software, including selling copies, exporting, renting, or pre-installing pirated software on hardware machines, are common examples of software piracy.

Social media platforms have emerged as prominent means of global connectivity, but they have also become hotspots for copyright infringements. Sharing copyrighted works, such as images and photographs, without proper authorization is a widespread issue. Misconceptions that materials posted on social media are free often lead to such violations.

Infringements on social media platforms may include re-posting, saving, or sharing copyrighted works without permission, falsely claiming ownership or creation rights of protected works, and using content without the owner’s prior consent. These copyright violations on social media platforms pose significant challenges in protecting intellectual property rights in the digital age.

JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES

In cases of online copyright infringement, the complexity arises from the involvement of multiple countries or regions due to the intangible nature of the internet. This creates a perplexing challenge in determining the appropriate jurisdiction to handle such matters. Protecting copyrights in the global market becomes especially challenging as copyright infringements often span across more than one state. This can occur because either the infringer or the copyright owner resides in a different country, or the act of infringement takes place in a jurisdiction different from where the copyright is registered.

The crucial question that emerges is which jurisdiction has the right to handle such cases. Each state and its legal system hold the responsibility of determining the court with jurisdiction when matters involve international elements, even in cases that are also subject to international treaties. The concept of territoriality plays a significant role in determining jurisdiction. This principle, deeply rooted in both municipal and international law, contributes to the complexity surrounding the protection and infringement of copyrights. After establishing an infringement case, the challenge lies in deciding which jurisdiction’s laws and courts should be applied, adding further difficulties to the process.

LAWS IN THIS REGARD

Types of work protected:

The Indian copyright law provides protection for a diverse range of creative works. Under the provisions of the Copyright Act, it safeguards the rights of creators and copyright holders in various categories, including:

Literary Works: This category encompasses original written works such as books, articles, poems, and computer programs.
Dramatic Works: It covers original scripts, plays, and other forms of dramatic writings.
Musical Works: This includes original compositions of music, both with or without lyrics.
Artistic Works: It protects original artworks, such as paintings, sculptures, photographs, and other visual creations.
Cinematograph Films: The copyright law safeguards the works of filmmakers, including movies and audio-visual productions.
Sound Recordings: This category covers original audio recordings, such as songs and music albums.[1]

By granting copyright protection to these diverse forms of expression, the Indian copyright law seeks to incentivize creativity and provide legal rights to creators, ensuring they have control over their works and are duly rewarded for their efforts.

Duration of protection

Under the Indian copyright law, different categories of works enjoy varying durations of protection:[2]

Literary, Dramatic, Musical, and Artistic Works: The copyright protection for these works lasts for the lifetime of the author plus sixty years. This period begins from the start of the calendar year following the year in which the author passes away.
Anonymous and Pseudonymous Works: For works published without revealing the true identity of the author (anonymous) or using a fictitious name (pseudonymous), the copyright protection also extends for a period of sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the year of publication.
Cinematograph Films: Copyright protection for cinematograph films endures for a period of sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the year of its publication.
Sound Recordings: The copyright protection for sound recordings also lasts for sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the year of its first publication.
Government Works: Works created by the government are subject to copyright protection for sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the year of publication.
Works by Public Undertakings: Copyright protection for works produced by public undertakings follows the same duration of sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the year of publication.
Works by International Agencies: Works created by international agencies are protected for sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the year of publication.
Photographs: The copyright protection for photographs lasts until sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year following the year in which the photograph was first published.

These copyright durations aim to strike a balance between rewarding creativity and allowing access to works for public benefit after a reasonable period.

RECENT JUDICIAL DEVELOPMENTS

Neetu Singh vs. Rajiv Saumitra & Ors.[3]

The Plaintiff sought a permanent injunction against the Defendants to prevent them from reproducing, publishing, distributing, selling, or offering for sale a copyrighted literary work titled “English for General Competitions,” along with related artistic works, for which the Plaintiff held the copyright. These books were originally published through Paramount Reader Publication and later by Paramount Reader Publication OPC Pvt. Ltd. The Plaintiff had granted the right to publish these books to Paramount Reader Publication, but no licenses, assignments, or transfers were made to the Defendants. The Defendants were well aware that the copyright in the books belonged to the Plaintiff, and they never raised any objections.

The Plaintiff claimed that the book unlawfully published by the Defendant was an exact copy that included all the artistic works and original mistakes. The Plaintiff argued that the copyright in her favour served as prima facie evidence of her authorship of the book, especially in the absence of a contract of service between the parties as per Section 17 of the Act.

In addressing the issue of whether a contract of service existed between the parties, the Court examined the fair use provision and made a distinction between works used for instructional purposes and those used for commercial purposes. It was held that the Defendant’s act of copying and selling the study material to students amounted to commercial activity and could not be considered fair use. The Court also highlighted that the Plaintiff’s employment status could be determined through the Articles of Association and any agreements, which were not present in this case. Consequently, the Court ruled in favour of the Plaintiff, recognizing her as the rightful owner of the copyright. It was emphasized that in disputes over copyright between employers and employees, the terms of employment play a crucial role in determining ownership.

The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of University of Oxford & Ors. Vs. Rameshwari Photocopy Service & Ors.[4]

The Court issued an injunction against Rameshwari Photocopy Service, prohibiting them from photocopying copyrighted works, following a petition filed by the Appellant publishers. The publishers alleged that the photocopy kiosk was infringing their copyright, leading to significant financial losses, as students were opting for photocopies instead of purchasing textbooks. However, the Court recognized that photocopying portions of books for personal use could be considered fair use, and copyright should not be treated as an absolute right. As a result, the ban was lifted, and the case was dismissed.

An appeal was made to the Higher Bench of the Delhi High Court, where an interim injunction was denied to the Appellants. The Court found that the Defendants’ actions did not constitute copyright infringement as they were justified for the purpose of educational instruction. The matter was referred back to the single bench of the Court to determine the necessity of using copyrighted material in course packs for educational purposes. The Court took into account the financial constraints faced by economically disadvantaged students who could not afford multiple textbooks. Eventually, the ban was lifted, and this decision was highly appreciated by students as it provided them with easy access to education through course packs.

M/S Lahari Recording Company vs. Union of India[5]

In the current petition, Lahari Recording Company, the Plaintiff, challenges the validity of sections 31 (1) (b) and 31 D of the Act, asserting that these provisions infringe upon its fundamental and constitutional rights. Section 31 (1) (b) introduces a system of compulsory licensing for works when the copyright owner refuses reasonable terms for their communication to the public. On the other hand, Section 31 D establishes a regime for mandatory licensing of works to broadcasting organizations, with terms determined by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB).

The Plaintiff argues that section 31 (1) (b) does not mandate hearing the copyright owner each time a compulsory license is granted to eligible parties determined by the IPAB. Similarly, section 31 D permits the grant of a statutory license without a hearing for the copyright owner. The crux of the Plaintiff’s petition is that these impugned provisions fundamentally alter the foundation of the copyright system by diminishing the incentives for copyright owners to create original content.

The Plaintiff’s grievance is that sections 31 (1) (b) and 31 D would disrupt existing voluntary license agreements with broadcasters, leading broadcasters to seek advantageous terms from the IPAB instead of continuing with the voluntary arrangements. According to the Plaintiff, this renders the provisions arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. By vesting the IPAB with the authority to formulate compulsory license terms, the provisions intrude upon the contractual freedom of copyright owners and unreasonably restrict their rights.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff challenges section 31 D, arguing that it removes the broadcaster-music label relationship from commercial negotiations and allows broadcasters to use copyrighted content at subsidized and preferential rates. This, the Plaintiff asserts, unfairly favors broadcasters’ commercial profitability over the interests of copyright owners. The Plaintiff contends that these provisions diminish the incentives for copyright owners to produce more original content. Practically, broadcasters may seek to avoid contractual arrangements with copyright owners and opt for the statutory licensing route, which is more favorable for them.

Though no responses have been filed yet, if the Petitioner convinces the Supreme Court, this case would become a landmark judgment by altering the very foundation of Copyright Law.

CONCLUSION

The issues in digital copyrights present a dynamic and challenging landscape that demands attention from all stakeholders in the digital age. As technology continues to evolve, so too must our approach to copyright protection. From combating rampant digital piracy to navigating the complexities of fair use and DRM, it is evident that the digital realm requires a well-crafted and adaptable legal framework.

Enforcement remains a key challenge, as the borderless nature of the internet blurs jurisdictional lines and makes identifying infringers a daunting task. International cooperation and harmonization of copyright laws are imperative to address these challenges effectively.

Moreover, as emerging technologies like AI, blockchain, and virtual reality become integral to content creation and distribution, it is crucial to ensure that copyright protection mechanisms keep pace. Striking the right balance between robust protection and encouraging innovation will be essential to foster a thriving digital ecosystem.

Education and awareness campaigns play a vital role in equipping both creators and users with the knowledge needed to navigate the intricacies of digital copyrights responsibly. Empowering content creators to understand and assert their rights and educating the public about the importance of respecting copyright are vital steps in preserving the integrity of creative works.

Ultimately, a collaborative effort is required from governments, tech companies, content creators, and consumers to address the challenges and craft a sustainable future for digital copyrights. By fostering an environment that respects intellectual property while embracing the opportunities that technology offers, we can ensure a vibrant and diverse digital landscape for generations to come.

As we move forward, it is crucial to strike a delicate balance between the protection of intellectual property and the promotion of innovation and creative expression. By doing so, we can build a future where digital copyrights are upheld, creators are rewarded for their contributions, and users can enjoy a rich and diverse digital content ecosystem with confidence and respect for one another’s rights.

REFERENCES

[1] Sec. 2(y) of Copyright Act 1957.

[2] Sec. 22-29 of Copyright Act 1957.

[3] MANU/DE/1912/2018

[4] MANU/DE/3285/2016

[5] Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No(s).: 667/2018