The Copyright Amendment Act, 2012, which came into force on June 21 2012, introduced major changes in the Indian Copyright Law. Various production houses and music labels have challenged the constitutional validity of these amendments before the Delhi High Court, by different petitions.
The amended Section 17 recognises the rights of the author as the first owner of original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, even if such works are commissioned under a contract as part of a cinematograph film. The producers have alleged that the amendment deprives them of equal protection as opposed to owners of other types of work.
The amended Sections 18 and 19 provide that authors of original literary works included in a cinematograph film shall be entitled to an equal share of royalties along with the producers of the films, when the copyrighted works are exploited in any form other than by way of display in a cinema hall. The artists cannot even assign or waive this right and any contract to the contrary would be void.
The producers have alleged that the amendment violates Article 14 by creating special rights only for lyricists/composers and thus discriminates against other classes of authors. The producers have also alleged violation of Article 19(1)(g) since it places an unreasonable restriction on their right to carry on their trade.
The music labels are concerned that the amended Section 31(1)(b) and Section 31 D of the Act violate Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and Article 300A. Both provisions deal with compulsory licences of musical works and it has been claimed that the provisions discriminate between different classes of works provided under the Act as well as between different categories of rights provided in respect of a copyright work.
It is also claimed that the provisions have curbed their freedom of contract by eliminating the incentive to third parties to seek voluntary licencses. The producers further argue that the provisions enable deprivation of their property rights without there being an urgent and primarily public necessity. It is also claimed that the Copyright Board has been delegated with too much unregulated discretionary power. The newly notified Rules dealing with the membership qualification for the Copyright Board have been separately challenged.
Other provisions of the amendments to the Act and the Rules have been challenged as well. The amendments were passed amid much controversy and fanfare and it will be crucial to see how the Delhi High Court rules in all these petitions.
|
V Lakshmikumaran |
Lakshmi Kumaran & Sridharan
B6/10 Safdarjung Enclave
New Delhi 110029
India
Tel: +91 11 41299800
Fax: +91 11 41299899
