A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF COPYRIGHT LAWS IN INDIA AND THE UNITED STATES

Author: Madhumitha. K, a Law student at SOEL, TNDALU

Abstract

Copyright law plays a pivotal role in safeguarding the rights of creators while balancing societal access to creative works. This research paper undertakes a comparative analysis of copyright laws in India and the United States, exploring their historical evolution, legislative frameworks, and judicial interpretations. By examining the Copyright Act, 1957 in India and the Copyright Act, 1976 in the US, the study identifies key similarities and differences in their approach to protecting intellectual property.

The analysis highlights critical aspects, including the scope of protected works, rights conferred to authors, duration of protection, and enforcement mechanisms. Particular attention is paid to exceptions and limitations, such as fair dealing in India and fair use in the US, reflecting contrasting philosophical underpinnings. The paper also delves into contemporary issues, including the challenges posed by digital piracy, artificial intelligence, and global technological advancements, and evaluates how both jurisdictions address these concerns.

Through doctrinal and comparative research methodologies, the paper examines the influence of international treaties, such as the Berne Convention and TRIPS Agreement, on domestic copyright frameworks. The findings reveal that while both countries strive to adapt their laws to modern challenges, significant differences persist, offering valuable lessons for global harmonization of copyright regulations and suggestions to provide better standards of copyright protection in India.

This research aims to provide actionable insights for policymakers and legal professionals contributing to the broader discourse on intellectual property rights in an increasingly interconnected world.

Keywords: Copyright law, Fair dealing, Fair use, Copyright protection, Enforcement of copyrights

Introduction

Copyright law serves as a cornerstone of intellectual property rights, protecting creators’ works while fostering innovation and creativity. India and the United States, with distinct legal traditions and socio-economic contexts, offer unique perspectives on copyright protection. This paper explores the similarities and differences between the two jurisdictions, focusing on their legislative frameworks, enforcement mechanisms, and response to emerging challenges like digital piracy and artificial intelligence. By comparing these systems, the study aims to uncover best practices and provide insights into the evolving landscape of copyright law in a globalized world.

An overview of copyright laws in India

The present Act for Copyright in India is the Copyright Act, 1957. This act is supported by the Copyright rules of 1958. These two are the governing laws of the copyright in India. a comprehensive statute aimed at protecting the rights of creators over their intellectual property. The Act defines the scope of copyrightable works, including literary, musical, artistic, and cinematographic creations, and confers exclusive rights to the creators to reproduce, distribute, and communicate their works to the public. For the work to be protected under this Act the work should be original and is novel in its nature. The acts that are considered as infringement under this act are: Copying, publicly issuing the copies of the work, Renting or lending the work to the public, showing the copyrighted work to the public, communicating the work to the public and Adopting the copyrighted work in to their work. Secondary infringement are: Selling of the work, Distributing or selling for the purpose of trade infringing the rights of the owner over the work, trade exhibits to the public, etc.

Several landmark cases have shaped the evolution of copyright law in India. In Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak, the Supreme Court clarified the concept of originality, holding that mere skill and labor are insufficient unless creativity is involved. In Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. Nirulas Corner House Pvt. Ltd., the Delhi High Court emphasized the need for licenses in the commercial use of copyrighted content.

An overview of copyright laws in the USA

The current copyright law in the United States is governed by the Copyright Act of 1976, which came into force on January 1, 1978. This Act provides protection for various categories of works, including literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, as well as photographs, graphic and sculptural works, motion pictures, sound recordings, and architectural designs.

Article one Section VI clause eight of US constitution conjointly called Copyright Clause, underneath the Copyright Clause, Congress has the facility, “To promote the Progress of Science and helpful Arts, by securing for restricted Times to Authors and Inventors the perquisite to their individual Writings and Discoveries.

For a work to qualify for protection under this Act, it must meet two essential criteria: originality and fixation. Originality requires the work to be independently created and not copied, demonstrating some degree of creativity. Fixation, as defined in Section 101 of the Act, refers to works that are “sufficiently permanent or stable to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated.” This ensures that the work exists in a tangible form.

Landmark cases have played a pivotal role in shaping copyright law in the US. In Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., the Supreme Court established that originality, rather than mere effort, is essential for copyright protection. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc reinforced the principle of fair use, holding that commercial parody could qualify as a permissible exception under copyright law.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States law that protects copyrighted works in the digital age. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on October 28, 1998.

Comparative analysis

Legal framework and protection:

The legal framework for copyright in India is governed by the Copyright Act, 1957, while in the US, it is guided by the Copyright Act of 1976. Both Acts protect original works such as literary, musical, artistic, and cinematographic creations. However, US law explicitly includes architectural works and sound recordings, while Indian law focuses more on cinematographic and literary works.

The term of protection differs slightly. India grants protection for the life of the author plus 60 years, whereas the US provides the author’s life plus 70 years. Both frameworks aim to balance creators’ rights with public access, though their emphasis on specific categories and enforcement mechanisms varies.

Fair dealing vs. Fair use:

One of the key differences between Indian and US copyright law lies in their approaches to exceptions and limitations on copyright protection: fair dealing in India and fair use in the United States.

One of the most significant distinctions between Indian and US copyright law is the approach to exceptions and limitations on copyright protection: fair dealing in India and fair use in the United States. While both concepts aim to balance the rights of creators with societal needs for access to creative works, their scope, application, and underlying philosophies differ substantially.

Fair Dealing in India

Section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 adopts the principle of fair dealing, which offers limited exceptions to copyright infringement. The Act specifies that the use of copyrighted material is permitted only for enumerated purposes such as private use, research, criticism, review, and reporting of current events, including current affairs and public speeches. The narrow scope of fair dealing ensures that the exceptions are strictly interpreted, and any use falling outside the listed purposes is considered infringement.

In Civic Chandran v. Ammini Amma, the Kerala High Court highlighted that fair dealing must involve a proportionate use of the copyrighted material, ensuring it does not supersede the original work or harm its commercial viability. For example, the reproduction of significant portions of a copyrighted work for commercial purposes is unlikely to qualify as fair dealing. Similarly, the decision in Academy of General Education v. B. Malini Mallya reinforced that fair dealing is to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, focusing on the purpose and extent of the use.

Fair Use in the US

Section 107 of the US Copyright Act of 1976 in the United States embodies the broader and more flexible doctrine of fair use, which provides a four-factor test to determine whether the use of a copyrighted work is permissible:

Purpose and character of the use: Courts consider whether the use is commercial or non-commercial, and whether it is transformative, meaning it adds new meaning, expression, or value to the original work. Transformative uses are more likely to qualify as fair use.
Nature of the copyrighted work: Non-fictional or factual works are more likely to be subject to fair use than creative works like novels or movies.
Amount and substantiality of the portion used: Using small, less significant portions of a work is more likely to be considered fair use, though even small portions may violate copyright if they constitute the “heart” of the work.
Effect of the use on the market value: If the use adversely impacts the market for the original work or potential derivatives, it is less likely to be deemed fair use.

In the landmark case Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. the US Supreme Court held that a parody of a song could qualify as fair use, emphasizing the transformative nature of the work. Similarly, in Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that Google’s use of Java APIs to create Android was fair use, as it added significant transformative value and innovation.

Comparison

The key distinction between fair dealing and fair use lies in their scope and flexibility. Fair use in the US is an open-ended doctrine, allowing courts significant discretion to evaluate whether a use qualifies as fair based on the context. This flexibility encourages creativity and innovation by permitting transformative and educational uses that contribute to societal progress.

On the other hand, fair dealing in India is a closed and restrictive doctrine, limited to specific purposes explicitly mentioned in the statute. While this approach provides certainty and safeguards the rights of creators, it may stifle innovation by not accommodating evolving uses, particularly in the digital age.

Enforcement mechanism and remedies:

The enforcement mechanisms under Indian and US copyright laws differ in terms of legal remedies, penalties, and overall effectiveness. While both jurisdictions aim to deter infringement and provide redress to rights holders, the approach and implementation vary significantly.

Enforcement Mechanisms in India

In India, the Copyright Act, 1957 provides both civil and criminal remedies for copyright infringement. The civil remedies, specified under Section 55, include:

Injunctions to prevent further infringement.
Recovery of damages (actual and statutory).
Accounts of profits made by the infringer.
Delivery of infringing copies for destruction.

Criminal remedies, detailed under Section 63, include:

Imprisonment of up to three years.
Fines of up to ₹2 lakh.
Both imprisonment and fines for severe infringements.

Despite these provisions, enforcement in India faces challenges such as judicial delays and limited awareness among stakeholders. Initiatives like the establishment of specialized Intellectual Property Appellate Boards (IPAB) and intermediary liability provisions under the Information Technology Act, 2000 have strengthened the enforcement landscape, particularly for online copyright infringements. However, currently the jurisdiction of copyright disputes are vested in the civil courts.

Enforcement Mechanisms in the US

The Copyright Act of 1976 provides comprehensive remedies to copyright owners. Under Section 502, rights holders can seek injunctions to restrain infringers. Section 504 provides for actual damages and statutory damages, which range from $750 to $150,000 per work infringed. Additionally, Section 506 establishes criminal penalties for willful infringement, particularly in cases involving piracy or counterfeiting.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) enhances enforcement in the digital realm, enabling rights holders to issue takedown notices and hold intermediaries liable for hosting infringing content. Institutions such as the US Copyright Office and Department of Justice (DOJ) play a pivotal role in enforcing copyright laws effectively.

Comparative Analysis

Legal Remedies: Both India and the US offer remedies such as injunctions, damages, and destruction of infringing materials. However, the US statutory damages under Section 504 are substantially higher, reflecting its strict stance against infringement, compared to India’s Section 55 provisions.
Penalties: Criminal penalties under Section 506 of the US Copyright Act are more severe and better enforced than those under Section 63 of the Indian Act, highlighting a significant gap in enforcement rigor.
Effectiveness: The US boasts robust enforcement due to specialized courts, clear statutory provisions, and institutional support. India, while making strides, still contends with lengthy judicial delays and limited public awareness, reducing the effectiveness of its enforcement mechanisms.

By incorporating specific sections, the contrast between the two jurisdictions becomes more precise. While the US demonstrates stronger infrastructure and proactive enforcement, India’s framework would benefit from streamlined judicial processes, enhanced institutional capacity, and broader awareness campaigns.

Impact of international treaties:

International treaties like the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement have significantly shaped copyright laws in both India and the US, ensuring alignment with global standards. The Berne Convention, to which both countries are signatories, mandates automatic protection of works across member states without requiring formal registration. This principle is reflected in the US Copyright Act, which eliminates the need for formalities under Section 104(b), and in India’s Copyright Act, 1957, under Section 40, allowing reciprocal protection. The TRIPS Agreement, overseen by the WTO, sets minimum standards for IP protection and enforcement, influencing India’s 1994 amendments to bolster enforcement mechanisms and the US’s robust provisions for digital rights under the DMCA. While the US has played a leading role in shaping these treaties, India has adopted them to modernize its laws and improve compliance, although enforcement gaps persist. These treaties ensure harmonization but also expose disparities in implementation and effectiveness.

Contemporary Issues and Challenges

The digital age has introduced a host of challenges to copyright law, particularly concerning piracy, streaming, and online distribution. Both India and the US face significant issues with digital piracy, where unauthorized copies of films, music, software, and other works are distributed freely across the internet. This piracy not only infringes on creators’ rights but also undermines the revenues of industries dependent on copyright protection. While the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) in the US and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) in India provide some recourse through takedown notices, enforcement remains an ongoing struggle due to the sheer volume of infringing content circulating online.

Streaming platforms have further complicated the copyright landscape. Services like Netflix, Amazon Prime, and YouTube have made it easier for consumers to access copyrighted works, but they also raise questions about fair compensation for creators, especially in global markets with varying copyright protections. In both countries, this issue continues to evolve as streaming and online distribution models rapidly develop, often outpacing legal frameworks.

Technological advancements have also made enforcement more difficult. The rise of digital content creation tools, peer-to-peer sharing, and anonymous online distribution platforms challenge traditional enforcement mechanisms. In the US, the DMCA offers provisions for notice-and-takedown procedures, but enforcement remains reactive rather than proactive.

The Indian Copyright Act, 1957, was amended in 2012 to address digital copyright issues more effectively. Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act provides exceptions for fair use in digital spaces, particularly for educational purposes and private use. Further, Section 66A of the IT Act holds intermediaries like internet service providers accountable for facilitating infringing content, allowing for more effective digital enforcement. However, the rapid growth of digital content and technology still presents enforcement challenges in India, similar to those in other jurisdictions.

Additionally, the increasing role of AI-generated works raises novel concerns regarding ownership and authorship. AI tools are capable of producing original creative works, such as art, music, and literature, but questions persist over who holds the copyright to these creations—whether it should be the developer of the AI, the user, or perhaps no one at all. In both India and the US, current copyright laws struggle to address the implications of AI-generated works, prompting calls for updates and reforms to accommodate these technological advancements.

Recommendations and Way Forward

To ensure that India’s copyright laws evolve in line with global standards and technological advancements, several reforms and improvements are essential. The country must enhance its enforcement mechanisms, particularly in addressing digital piracy and online distribution, while also harmonizing its laws with international frameworks. By strengthening penalties, expanding the role of intermediaries in monitoring digital content, and offering clearer regulations around emerging issues like AI-generated works, India can modernize its copyright system. Additionally, fostering greater international cooperation and participation in global treaties will help India combat piracy and ensure fair use of copyrighted works in the digital age. These steps will enable India to be at the forefront of the global copyright landscape, promoting creativity, protecting rights, and enabling fair access.

Strengthening Enforcement Mechanisms:

India must modernize its enforcement mechanisms to deal with the rapid growth of digital piracy and streaming platforms. This includes introducing more proactive measures, such as better technological solutions (e.g., automated content recognition systems), and strengthening penalties for online infringement.

Harmonizing Copyright Laws with Global Standards:

To remain competitive globally, India should update its laws to address emerging issues like AI-generated works. Clear guidelines for ownership, authorship, and protection of such works would help India keep pace with evolving international norms and technological changes.

Establishing Specialized IP Courts:

India could benefit from setting up specialized Intellectual Property (IP) courts, similar to those in the US. This would expedite legal proceedings related to copyright disputes, offering more efficient resolution of cases and improving overall enforcement.

Expanding the Role of Intermediaries in Digital Enforcement:

Intermediaries, such as internet service providers and social media platforms, should be more actively involved in preventing and reporting copyright infringement. Strengthening their responsibility in monitoring content can significantly improve digital enforcement.

Emphasizing International Cooperation:

International collaboration is vital to addressing digital copyright challenges, such as global piracy networks and online infringement. By participating more actively in international treaties and working closely with other countries, India can help establish a unified approach to copyright protection in the digital age.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the comparative analysis of copyright laws in India and the US reveals both similarities and significant differences, influenced by historical, technological, and cultural factors. While both countries share common principles, such as protection for a wide range of works and adherence to international treaties like the Berne Convention and TRIPS, their enforcement mechanisms and responses to emerging challenges differ. India’s copyright framework has made strides, particularly with its amendments to address digital issues, but it still faces challenges in keeping up with rapid technological advancements, piracy, and AI-generated content. The US, with its established legal infrastructure and proactive enforcement measures, offers valuable lessons for India. Moving forward, India can enhance its copyright protection by modernizing enforcement tools, harmonizing its laws with global standards, and fostering international cooperation. By doing so, India can better protect creators, foster innovation, and remain competitive in the evolving global digital landscape.

References

Bibliography