India: An expansive education exception to literary works

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

India: An expansive education exception to literary works

In a recent decision that has been welcomed and criticised all at the same time, the Delhi High Court in The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford v Rameshwari Photocopy Services & Ors has given, as is argued by many, an expansive interpretation to copyright exceptions applicable to educational institutions.

The infringement case was against the preparation and distribution of course packs or compilations of photocopied portions of different books prescribed in the syllabus of a University. This was contracted out to a photocopy services company by the University. As the Court observed, the case boiled down to whether such actions are exempt from copyright infringement. On both counts, the Court ruled in favour of the University and photocopy services provider.

Indian copyright law contains a long list of enumerated exceptions to copyright infringement and the heart of the judgment relates to the one exception that allows a teacher or a pupil to reproduce a copyright protected work, inter alia, in the "course of instruction". The Court was of the view that creating course packs was included in this exception, since it fell within the ambit of the "process commencing from the teacher readying herself/himself for imparting instruction, setting syllabus, prescribing text books, readings and ensuring, whether by interface in classroom/tutorials or otherwise by holding tests from time to time or clarifying doubts of students, that the pupil stands instructed in what he/she has approached the teacher to learn". The Court further ruled that the application of this exception is not affected merely because the work is contracted out to a third party service provider.

Such questions of law are never likely to have one correct answer, though some of the statements in the judgment do raise eyebrows. The Berne Convention provides India with the discretion to allow reproduction, but only in special cases, if it does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author. Whether the Court's ruling properly accounts for the Berne Convention's test is a different story altogether.

R Parthasarathy


Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan

B6/10 Safdarjung Enclave

New Delhi 110029, India

Tel: +91 11 41299800

Fax:91 11 41299899

vlakshmi@lakshmisri.com

www.lslaw.in

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Sheppard has added quantum and robotics expertise to its AI industry team to help clients navigate questions around inventorship and IP infringement
The 2026 Americas ceremony recognised outstanding firms and practitioners, along with highlighting impact cases of the year
A development concerning Stephen Thaler’s AI copyright application in India and an integration between IPH group firms were also among the top talking points
As concerns around the little-known litigation tool increase, practitioners say they are educating their clients on how it can be most effective
Kilburn & Strode and Mewburn Ellis are just two firms that have invested heavily in office space – a sign that the legal industry is serious about in-person working
In major recent developments, Dyson snagged another win against Hong Kong-based competitor Dreame and a new AI-powered UPC platform was launched
Mohit and Sidhant Goel decided not to pursue an interim injunction application so that their client, Communications Components Antenna, could benefit from a fast-track trial
Anita Cade, head of Ashurst’s IP and media team in Australia, discusses why law firms that can pull together capability across different practice areas and jurisdictions stand to gain
INTA’s CEO says London-based firms have registered fewer delegates compared to past meetings in San Diego and Atlanta, and questions the 'ethics' of trying to participate without registering
Lobbies and interest groups are among the interveners in a major dispute over whether courts can set patent pool rates
Gift this article