P a g e | 1

Doctrine of Exhaustion in Indian Copyright Law

- Apoorva Agrawal

A. Introduction
Copyright is a form of intellectual property protection granted to the creators of original
works of authorship such as literary works (including computer programs, tables and
compilations, computer databases epressed in words, codes, schemes or in any other form,
including a machine readable medium! dramatic, musical and artistic works, cinematographic
films and sound recordings" A copyright is a bundle of intangible rights which bestow on the
owner of a copyright an eclusive privilege, for a specific period of time, to make copies of
his work for production and sale" #he works protected by a copyright cannot and do not eist
in seclusion" $uch works are given a tangible form through one medium or the other" #he
main debate this paper deals with is regarding the legal status of the copy of the work which
has been sold, and whether or not the owner of the copyright in the work can have a hold over
conse%uent sales"
Background
#he first copyright statute was the &ritish $tatute of Anne of 1'(), *An Act for the
+ncouragement of ,earning, by vesting the Copies of Printed &ooks in the Authors or
purchasers of such Copies, during the #imes therein mentioned-"
1
Copyright laws are
partially standardi.ed through international and regional agreements such as the &erne
/
$tudent of the 000
rd
year of the 1 year ,aw course, 0,$ ,aw College, Pune"
1
2ac3ueen, 4ector ,, Charlotte 5aelde and 6raeme # ,aurie (7(('!" Contemporary Intellectual Property Law
and Policy8 9ford :niversity Press"
P a g e | 7
Convention
7
and the +uropean copyright directives" +ven though the copyright laws of a
nation are consistent, each ;urisdiction has separate and distinct laws and regulations covering
copyright" <ational copyright laws on licensing, transfer and assignment of copyright still
vary greatly among countries and copyrighted works are licensed on a territorial basis"
Copyright in respect of each work generally subsists for a period of sity years after the
death of its author" 0n the 0ndian Copyright Act, 1)=', this bundle of rights is defined under
$ection 1>" As per the $ection, the precise rights which the owner of a copyright en;oys in
respect of a work, would vary depending on the nature of the work
?
" #he rights under $ection
7
&erne Convention for the Protection of ,iterary and Artistic 5orks, $ept" ), 1@@A, as revised at Paris on Buly
7>, 1)'1 and amended in 1)'), $" #reaty Coc" <o" ))-7' (1)@A!, available at
DhttpEFFwww"wipo"intFtreatiesFenFipFberneFtrtdocsGwo((1"htmlH
?
$ection 1>, Copyright Act, 1)='E-
Ior the purposes of this Act, JcopyrightJ means the eclusive right sub;ect to the provisions of this Act, to do or
authorise the doing of any of the following acts in respect of a work or any substantial part thereof, namelyE-
(a! in the case of a literary, dramatic or musical work, not being a computer programme, -
(i! to reproduce the work in any material form including the storing of it in any medium by electronic means8
(ii! to issue copies of the work to the public not being copies already in circulation8
(iii! to perform the work in public, or communicate it to the public8
(iv! to make any cinematograph film or sound recording in respect of the work8
(v! to make any translation of the work8
(vi! to make any adaptation of the work8
(vii! to do, in relation to a translation or an adaptation of the work, any of the acts specified in relation to the
work in sub-clauses (i! to (vi!8
(b! in the case of a computer programme,-
(i! to do any of the acts specified in clause (a!
(ii! to sell or give on commercial rental or offer for sale or for commercial rental any copy of the computer
programmeE
Provided that such commercial rental does not apply in respect of computer programmes where the programme
itself is not the essential ob;ect of the rental"
(c! in the case of an artistic work,-
(i! to reproduce the work in any material form including depiction in three dimensions of a two dimensional
work or in two dimensions of a three dimensional work8
(ii! to communicate the work to the public8
P a g e | ?
1> can be eercised only by the owner of copyright or by any other person to whom the
original owner transfers the ownership of the copyright" #he rights include the right of
adaptation, right of reproduction, right of publication, right to make translations,
communication to public etc"
B. Doctrine of Exhaustion
#he +haustion Coctrine or the *Iirst $ale Coctrine-
>
is one of the basic rules of intellectual
property (0P! system, and is applied to many 0P rights, from copyrights to trademarks" #he
term *ehaustion- or *first sale- describes a concept or a rule, wherein, after the *first sale-
of a particular legitimate work, the 0P owner loses the right to control any subse%uent sales of
that particular copy of the work" Applying the principle more specifically to copyrights, the
purchaser of the copy of the work may sell that copy of the work without the consent or the
(iii! to issue copies of the work to the public not being copies already in circulation8
(iv! to include the work in any cinematograph film8
(v! to make any adaptation of the work8
(vi! to do in relation to an adaptation of the work any of the acts specified in relation to the work in sub-clauses
(i! to (iv!8
(d! 0n the case of cinematograph film, -
(i! to make a copy of the film, including a photograph of any image forming part thereof8
(ii! to sell or give on hire, or offer for sale or hire, any copy of the film, regardless of whether such copy has
been sold or given on hire on earlier occasions8
(iii! to communicate the film to the public8
(e! 0n the case of sound recording, -
(i! to make any other sound recording embodying it8
(ii! to sell or give on hire, or offer for sale or hire, any copy of the sound recording regardless of whether such
copy has been sold or given on hire on earlier occasions8
(iii! to communicate the sound recording to the public"
+planationE Ior the purposes of this section, a copy which has been sold once shall be deemed to be a copy
already in circulation"
>
9r, in :$ terminology, the *Iirst $ale Coctrine- K #his common law doctrine is codified at 1' :$C $ection
1()(a!"
P a g e | >
authori.ation of the owner, and would not, by the said sale, infringe the copyright subsisting
in the work" #hus, the doctrine of ehaustion has the power to interfere with the copyright
ownerLs eclusive market position, reducing any scope for price differentiation and eposing
the product to intensified price competition"
Illustration: MAL (owner of a copyrighted work! publishes his work" M&L purchases a copy of
the work " M&L can, without any authori.ation of MAL, sell that copy of the work to MCL and will
not infringe the copyright that eists in the work"
#he ehaustion doctrine is grouped into three kindsE
a! international ehaustion
b! national ehaustion and
c! territorial or regional ehaustion"
a) International Exhaustion
5hen a country recogni.es the doctrine of *international ehaustion-, an 0PN holderLs right
to control movement is etinguished when a good or service is first sold or marketed
anywhere in the world"
=
b) National Exhaustion
5hen a country recogni.es the doctrine of *national- ehaustion, an 0PN holderLs right to
control movement of a good or service is only etinguished by the first sale or marketing of a
good or service within the territory of that country"
A
=
:<C#AC, Resource Book on TRIPS and Development (7((=!, pg )>"
A
Id.
P a g e | =
c) Territorial or Regional Exhaustion
5hen a country recogni.es the doctrine of *territorialFregional- ehaustion, an 0PN holderLs
right to control movement is etinguished when a good or service is first sold or marketed in
any region of the country"
'
+ven though the rule of ehaustion deals primarily with the control and nature of goods
and services that embody an 0PN, it plays a very important role in trade" 5ithout the said rule,
trade and different types of uses, transfers, characteristics and activities (whether political,
social or economic! of goods and services will be harshly impaired as too much control will
be granted to the 0PN holder" Ior eample, common acts like lending a book to a friend to
read, selling an already used CC or recycling a used ;uice container and turning it into a
useful bag or any other accessory, can be forbidden by the 0PN holder" #his would lead to too
much a restriction on the free echange of goods and services in the national, regional and
global markets" #he main assumption here is that free echange of goods and services in all
the markets is advantageous for commerce, economic development, increased innovation and
the sharing of cultures and knowledge" 0n a way, ehaustion regulates how the physical
personifications of 0PN are controlled and transferred in order to ensure that there is an
e%uilibrium between the rights of 0PN holders and those of the general public and, on a large-
scale, the larger international community"
C. The Doctrine under the Indian Law
Article A of the #rade-Nelated Aspects of 0ntellectual Property Nights (#N0P$!
@
addresses the
ehaustion of intellectual property rights" #he concept of ehaustion plays an enormously
'
Id.
@
#N0P$, Article AE Ior the purposes of dispute settlement under this Agreement, sub;ect to the provisions of
Articles ? (<ational #reatment! and > (2ost-Iavoured-<ation #reatment! nothing in this Agreement shall be
used to address the issue of the ehaustion of intellectual property rights"
P a g e | A
important role in determining the way the intellectual property rules affect the movement of
goods and services in international trade
)
" 9ur 0ndian law also, is not ignorant to the issue of
the ehaustion of the copyright ownerLs rights and the provisions of the Act could be
interpreted to appreciate the ehaustion doctrine and its applicability in the various
copyrighted works"
$ection 1> contains a number of provisions which deal with different kinds of works, and it is
under the provisions of this $ection that copyright owners have the rightE
to issue copies of a literary, dramatic or musical work to the public, not being copies
already in circulation8
1(
(a! to issue copies of a computer programme to the public, not being copies already in
circulation and (b! to sell or give on commercial rental or offer for sale or for
commercial rental any copy of the computer programme where the programme itself
is the essential ob;ect of the rental8
11
to issue copies of an artistic work to the public, not being copies already in
circulation8
17
to sell or give on hire, or offer for sale or hire, any copy of a film, regardless of
whether such copy has been sold or given on hire on earlier occasions8
1?
and
)
:<C#AC, Resource Book on TRIPS and Development (7((=!, pg )7"
1(
$ection 1>(a!(ii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
11
$ection 1>(b!(i! and (ii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
17
$ection 1>(c!(iii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
1?
$ection 1>(d!(ii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
P a g e | '
to sell or give on hire, or offer for sale or hire, any copy of the sound recording
regardless of whether such copy has been sold or given on hire on earlier occasions8
1>
#herefore, the owners of literary, dramatic, musical, or artistic works as well as of computer
programmes have the same rightE to issue copies of the works they own to the public
provided those copies are not *already in circulation-" An Eplanation affied to $ection 1>
states that *for the purposes of this section, a copy which has been sold once shall be deemed
to be a copy already in circulation-"
#he owners of computer programmes also have an added rightE the right to sell or give on
commercial rental or offer for sale or for commercial rental any copy of the programme
unless the rental of the programme is only incidental"
And, lastly, the owners of films and sound recordings en;oy the right to sell or give on hire, or
offer for sale or hire, any copy of their works whether or not that copy has already been sold
or given on hire" As it can clearly be seen, there is a significant dissimilarity in the way in
which various kinds of copyrighted works are treated in $ection 1> of the Act" 9wners of
copyright have the eclusive right to issue copies of their work to the public only in
accordance with the provisions of this $ection read in concurrence with $ection =1 which
deals with infringement"
Literary, Dramatic, Musical and rtistic !orks and "om#uter $rogrammes
:nder $ection 1> of the Act, it is the right of those who own the copyright in literary,
dramatic, musical and artistic works, as well as computer programmes *to issue copies of the
work to the public not being copies already in circulation-" Copies once sold are supposed to
be copies already in circulation"
1>
$ection 1>(e!(ii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
P a g e | @
A %uestion which has fre%uently cropped up in regard to the ehaustion of rights in literary
works
1=
is as to the place where the rights of the copyright owner under $ection 1>(a!(ii! are
ehausted8 is it only within the particular territoryFcountry of sale, worldwide or, is it in the
territory designated by the copyright owner for its sale"
According to the Act, once a copy has been sold, it is supposed to be in circulation" 4owever,
the Act does not make clear where it is supposed to be in circulation" 0f it is deemed to be in
circulation in 0ndia, it would follow that it is that right of the copyright owner to issue copies
of the work to the public, such work not being in circulation in 0ndia" As such, the copyright
owner would have lost or ehausted his right to re-issue that copy only in 0ndia" 4is rights
beyond the territory of 0ndia would remain the same" 4owever, to reach such a conclusion,
the reasoning one would have to use could be not very direct" 0t would probably be necessary
to rely on the territorial nature of copyright, and the fact that the Act applies only to 0ndia"
1A
#he second possibility is that the rights are ehausted in those territories where the copyright
owner intends that the work be sold" #his is a possibility which the 0ndian Courts have tended
to bend towards, although the logic has not always been very clear"
#he final possibility is that once a lawful copy of a work is lawfully sold, the copyright owner
loses all rights in respect of the resale of that copy of the work throughout the world" #his
would be supported by the fact that the Eplanation to $ection 1> does not state that the first
lawful sale would result in the sold copy being deemed to be in circulation only within 0ndia"
Also, if one were to consider $ection =1 of the Act which defines infringement, copyright
infringement would occur only when a person imports into 0ndia any infringing copies of a
work"
1'
#here is nothing in $ection =1 which speaks about the eport of copyrighted works"
1=
Although this Part refers to literary works, analogous principles apply to dramatic, musical and artistic works,
as well as to computer programmes"
1A
A"$" $rivastav, Lal!s Commentaries on Law o" Copyri#$t, Celhi ,aw 4ouse, Celhi, 7((("
1'
$ection =1(b!(iv!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
P a g e | )
#herefore, it should be possible to conclude that 0ndian law would allow such eport, and if
that were the case, it would seem that 0ndia could be considered to follow a principle of
international ehaustion with respect to copyright"
#his final interpretation is not one which the courts have wholeheartedly approved though"
1@
#he Courts have veered towards respecting the divisions of rights along territorial lines by
publishers K a form of division which is supported by $ections 1)(7!, 1)(A! and ?(A of the
Act
1)
K and have been inclined to hold that as far as literary works are concerned, the
ehaustion of rights takes place on the first legal sale of a copy of a work only within the
territory in which the copyright owner planned the work to be sold" #hus, the copyright
owner would go on to en;oy the right of resale in respect of all other territories in 0ndia"
18
(a! Pen#uin Books Ltd. v. India Book Distri%utors and &rs. A0N 1)@= Celhi 7)8
(b! Eurokids International Pvt. Ltd. v. India Book Distri%utors E#mont Books Ltd. 7((= (A! &omCN 1)@8
(c! 'o$n (iley ) Sons Inc. ) &rs. v. Pra%$at C$ander *umar 'ain ) &rs" 0A <o" 11??1F7((@ in C$ (9$! <o"
1)A(F7((@ dated 2ay 1', 7(1(8
(d! 'o$n (iley ) Sons Inc. ) &rs. v. International Book Store ) +nr. C$ (9$! <o" 7>@@F7((@ O 0A <o"
7@=AF7(() dated 2ay 7(, 7(1("
1)
$ection 1)(7!, Copyright Act, 1)='E #he assignment of copyright in any work shall identify such work, and
shall specify the rights assigned and the duration and territorial etent of such assignment"
$ection 1)(A!, Copyright Act, 1)='E 0f the territorial etent of assignment of the rights is not specified, it shall be
presumed to etend within 0ndia"
$ection ?(A, Copyright Act, 1)='E #he provisions of sections 1) and 1)A shall, with any necessary adaptations
and modifications, apply in relation to a licence under section ?( as they apply in relation to assignment of
copyright in a work"
P a g e | 1(
Rental Right and %o&t'are
#he Nental Night is a rather new right in copyright ;urisprudence" #N0P$ specifically
mandated its recognition
7(
with respect to computer programmes and films although the right
was not introduced by #N0P$ and has an older genesis"
0n 0ndia, the rental right first appeared in the Act in 1))>, and was pro;ected to facilitate the
flow of remuneration to copyright owners which (notably in the case of cinematograph film!
may be assisted by appropriate collective administration through copyright societies, these
rights will also provide an added safeguard against distribution of infringing copies"
71
#he
Nental Night came into being due to concerns that the commercial rental of computer
programmes promotes programmes which are rented to be illegitimately reproduced by those
who rent them leading to people, who indulge in it, not needing to buy their own copies of the
programmes" #his would decrease the revenues made by the copyright owners, and thereby
diminish proceeds on their investment which would further lead to the decrease in the
incentive of the authors of works protected by copyright to create new works"
&esides the right to issue copies of software to the public which are copies not already in
circulation, the owners of computer programmes have the right, under $ection 1>(b!(ii!, to
sell or give on commercial rental or offer for sale or for commercial rental any copy of the
relevant computer programme as long as the programme itself is the essential ob;ect of the
rental"
7(
#N0P$, Article 11E in respect of at least computer programs and cinematograph works, a 2ember shall
provide authors and their successors in title the right to authori.e or to prohibit the commercial rental to the
public of originals or copies of their copyright works" A 2ember shall be ecepted from this obligation in
respect of cinematographic works unless such rental had led to widespread copying of such works which is
materially impairing the eclusive right of reproduction conferred in the 2ember on authors and their
successors in title" 0n respect of computer programs, this obligation does not apply to rentals where the program
itself is not the essential ob;ect of the rental"
71
$tatement of 9b;ects and Neasons appended to the 1))7 Amendment &ill (<o" 1(= of 1))7! states, in para 1A"
P a g e | 11
0n the case of software, in addition to the right to issue copies of computer programmes not
already in circulation to the public under $ection 1>(a!(ii!
77
of the Act, copyright owners
en;oy an additional rightE the rental right under $ection 1>(b!(ii!" #he latter provision was
amended in 1))) to restrict the scope of the right to commercial rentals where the relevant
computer programme itself was not the essential ob;ect of the rental"
7?
#his is a
straightforward eception to the first sale doctrine" 4owever, the right of resale in $ections
1>(b!(ii! and 1>(a!(ii! overlap and their cumulative effect is ambiguous"
6iven that the two $ections contain contradictory positions, there may be different ways to
construe their cumulative effect" Iirstly, $ection 1>(a!(ii! may weaken K or, possibly, even
negate K 1>(b!(ii!" 0f this were the case, as far as subse%uent resale is concerned, the principle
of ehaustion would apply to computer programmes (with all its vagaries! in the same
manner that it applies to literary works under $ection 1>(a!(ii!" $econdly, $ection 1>(b!(ii! is
to take preference over $ection 1>(a!(ii!, which would be convincing since $ection 1>(b!(ii!
has been drafted eclusively in respect of computer programmes" 0f this second interpretation
were accurate, there would be a clear cut eception to the +haustion Coctrine under 0ndian
law with regard to computer programmes"
(ilms and %ound Recordings
#he 1))> Amendment provided that the copyright owner would have the eclusive right to
sell or give on hire, or offer for sale or hire, any copy of the work, regardless of whether such
copy has been sold or given on hire on earlier occasions8 the work in %uestion could have
77
$ection 1>(a!(ii! is applicable to computer programmes vide $ection 1>(b!(i!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
7?
0n all probability, because there were issues of implementation since most products used some form of
software and accordingly the rights of resale and hire to copyright owners created problems since these rights
hampered the resale and hire of products into which computer programmes were only incidentally embedded"
P a g e | 17
been a computer programme
7>
, film
7=
, or sound recording
7A
" Cue to this, films and sound
recordings en;oy a special position under the ActE copyright owners continue to control the
resale andFor hire of a copy of a film or sound recording even after its first sale"
7'
#his
provision was, as mentioned earlier, introduced in the 1))> amendment *to facilitate the flow
of remuneration to copyright owners-"
7@
#his has prevented the development of a legitimate
second-hand market in films without the assent of the copyright owners, and disallowed the
recognition of the doctrine of ehaustion with respect to either films or sound recordings"
Iurther, Article 11 of #N0P$ also re%uires that the Nental Night be recognised in respect of
computer programmes and films" 4owever, given how closely connected the 0ndian film and
music industries are, it may not have been sensible to limit the application of provisions
relating to the Nental Night to films, and to eliminate sound recordings" #he result has been
that 0ndian copyright law does not recognise the Coctrine of +haustion with regard to either
films or sound recordings"
&y letting copyright owners to control sales succeeding to the first sale of a copy of a film or
sound recording, and to forbid the hire of copies which have been legally purchased, the
*period of eploitation- of such copies could be considered to have been increased" Popular
belief is that this helps to increase revenues for the copyright owners, usually film production
houses or music companies, and that such increased revenues assure the owners of the
copyright in films and sound recordings returns on their investment and, further, that such
increased revenues ultimately result in a trickle-down effect which increase the dues payable
to the authors of the underlying works contained in films and sound recordings" 5hile
7>
$ection 1>(b!(ii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
7=
$ection 1>(d!(ii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
7A
$ection 1>(e!(ii!, Copyright Act, 1)='"
7'
(arner Bros. Entertainment Inc. v. Santos$ ,.-.. (7(()! 7 20PN 1'= (Cel!"
7@
$tatement of 9b;ects and Neasons appended to the 1))7 Amendment &ill (<o" 1(= of 1))7!, Para" 1A"
P a g e | 1?
$ections 1>(d!(ii! and 1>(e!(ii! would almost certainly increase the revenues of production
houses and music companies, it is not very clear as to what etent they do so, and it is also
not very clear whether any trickle-down effect benefitting the authors of underlying works
actually eists"
D. Conclusion
#hus, the recognition given to the Coctrine of +haustion under the 0ndian Copyright Act is
limited, and there are a number of eceptions to it"
#he Copyright (Amendment! &ill, 7(1( has proposed to recognise the principle of
international ehaustion in respect of all classes of works by amending $ection 7(m! of the
Act which defines infringing copies
7)
and $ections 1>(d!(ii!
?(
and 1>(e!(ii!
?1
which affect
films and sound recordings" 4owever, these proposed amendments would not affect the rental
right" #he &ill proposes to add a proviso to $ection 7(m! of the Act stating that a copy of a
work published in any country outside 0ndia with the permission of the author of the work
and imported from that country into 0ndia shall not be deemed to be an infringing copy" 0f this
proposed amendment were to become law, it would become %uite clear that 0ndia follows a
principle of international ehaustion" 0n the case of the publishing industry, international
ehaustion would, inter alia, damage the ,ow Priced +dition (,P+! programme on which
innumerable 0ndian students rely, decrease royalties payable to authors, and weaken the
revenue streams of publishers" #his is because there would be little incentive for publishers to
7)
$ection 7(v!, Copyright Amendment &ill, 7(1(E 0n clause (m!, the following proviso shall be inserted, namelyE
*Provided that a copy of a work published in any country outside 0ndia with the permission of the author of the
work and imported from that country into 0ndia shall not be deemed to be an infringing copy"-
?(
$ection ?(ii!(b!, Copyright Amendment &ill, 7(1(E for sub-clause (ii!, the following sub-clause shall be
substituted, namelyE *(ii! to sell or give on commercial rental or offer for sale or for such rental, any copy of the
film"-
?1
$ection ?(iii!(b!, Copyright Amendment &ill, 7(1(E for sub-clause (ii!, the following sub-clause shall be
substituted, namelyE *(ii! to sell or give on commercial rental or offer for sale or for such rental, any copy of the
sound recording"-
P a g e | 1>
publish ,P+s in 0ndia if the 0ndian market was insecure and ,P+s could legally be leaked
abroad, thereby weakening primary markets"
#he film and music industry, too, would be negatively affected as films and sound recordings
would no longer en;oy a special position under the Act" #he &ill proposes to delete the words
*regardless of whether such copy has been sold or given on hire on earlier occasions- from
$ections 1>(d!(ii! and 1>(e!(ii! of the Act" #his could mean that films and sound recordings
would be treated in the same manner as literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works" A
second, more probable interpretation would be that the words proposed to be deleted are
merely a clarification and are devoid of any substantive value" 4owever, in spite of the
interpretation adopted, it would probably be far-fetched to say that the &ill would not lead to
international ehaustion in regard to films and sound recordings" &y forbidding copyright
owners from controlling sales successive to the first sale, the period of eploitation of films
and sound recordings would decrease" #his, in turn, would probably reduce the revenues
generated by the sale of C1CsF1CCs" #he accumulation of potentially lower revenues to
distributors may unfavourably affect the amount distributors are willing to pay for ac%uiring
distribution rights, and that the possibility of lower amounts being paid to producers would
have a *trickle-down effect- which would be to the loss of all those involved in film
production and the authors of underlying works"
0nstead of crafting straightforward provisions which would benefit the authors of underlying
works, the Copyright (Amendment! &ill, 7(1( appears to create an etremely confusing
situation which is most likely to benefit those who focus on interpreting the law, and not
those in regard to whom the law would apply"
0t is uncertain why the &ill proposes to have international ehaustion apply across the board
in the sphere of copyright although the aim might be to bring 0ndian copyright law into line
P a g e | 1=
with patent and trade mark law, both of which recognise international ehaustion" 4owever,
the copyright industries follow unusual business models, and the recognition of international
ehaustion might not be ideal"
E. Bibliography
Books)
Nesource &ook on #N0P$ and Cevelopment, :<C#AC, Cambridge, 7((="
,alLs Commentaries on ,aw of Copyright by A"$" $rivastav, Celhi ,aw 4ouse, 7((("
An :nhurried 1iew of Copyright by &en;amin Paplan"
0nternational Copyright and <eighbouring NightsE #he &erne Convention and &eyond
by $am Nicketson, 1ol" 1, second edition, 9ford, 7((A"
"ases re&erred)
Eurokids International Pvt. Ltd. v. India Book Distri%utors E#mont Books Ltd", 7((=
(A! &omCN 1)@"
'o$n (iley ) Sons Inc. ) &rs. v. International Book Store ) +nr.. C$ (9$! <o"
7>@@F7((@ O 0A <o" 7@=AF7(() dated 2ay 7(, 7(1("
'o$n (iley ) Sons Inc. ) &rs. v. Pra%$at C$ander *umar 'ain ) &rs.. 0A <o"
11??1F7((@ in C$ (9$! <o" 1)A(F7((@ dated 2ay 1', 7(1("
Pen#uin Books Ltd. v. India Book Distri%utors and &rs.. A0N 1)@= Celhi 7)"
(arner Bros. Entertainment Inc. and &rs. v. /r. Santos$ ,. -.. (7(()! 7 20PN 1'=
(Cel!"