GOVERNMENT LAW COLLEGE

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

PROJECT

On

CRITICAL ANALYSIS : Section 52 of the Copyrights Act,

1957

Prepared by

Janhavi Jagdish Dudhwadkar

V – V - B.L.S. LL. B Sem – X

Div : B Roll No. 35

Under the Guidance of

Prof. Khushwant Pawar

Government Law College, Mumbai

 Index

Sr. No. Particulars Page No.

1. Introduction 1
2. Scope of Section 52 2
3. Interpretation of Section 52 3-4
4. Impact of Section 52 5-6
5. Criticisms and Debates 7-8
6. Comparing Section 52 with International Copyright Laws: 9-10
Balancing Rights in a Globalized World
7. Enforcements and Remedies 11-13
8. Future Implications and Challenges 14-16
9. Conclusions 17
 Abstract

Copyright plays a pivotal role in fostering creativity by granting creators exclusive rights over
their original works. This exclusivity allows them to control how their work is used and
potentially profit from it. However, a delicate balance exists between protecting creators' rights
and allowing for the free flow of information and ideas. This balance is achieved through the
concept of fair dealing.

Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, is India's statutory provision for fair dealing. It allows
the use of copyrighted material for specific purposes without the copyright holder's permission.
This research paper will critically analyze Section 52, examining its objectives, limitations, and
its role in promoting creative expression while safeguarding copyright protection.
This analysis will delve into the four factors courts consider when determining fair dealing
under Section 52. It will also explore landmark judgments that have shaped the interpretation
of this provision. Further, the paper will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Section 52,
including its potential for ambiguity and the need for clarity in the digital age. Finally, a brief
comparison with the concept of fair use in other jurisdictions will provide a broader perspective
on fair dealing principles.

By critically evaluating Section 52, this paper aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of
its role in fostering a vibrant creative ecosystem in India.
 Chapter 1 : Introduction

Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, serves a critical purpose within the Indian copyright
framework. It carves out exceptions to the exclusive rights granted to copyright holders,
allowing for the limited use of copyrighted material without their permission1234. This concept,
known as fair dealing, aims to achieve a crucial balance:
• Protecting Creators' Rights: Copyright grants creators exclusive rights over their
original works, allowing them to control how their work is used and potentially benefit
financially from it. This incentivizes creativity and ensures creators are fairly
compensated for their efforts.
• Promoting Creativity and Public Interest: However, a rigid copyright system could
stifle creativity by hindering the use of existing works for purposes like criticism,
research, or education. Fair dealing allows for the limited use of copyrighted material
for these purposes, fostering a vibrant creative ecosystem where new ideas can build
upon existing ones.

Here's a breakdown of the specific objectives of Section 52:

• Enabling Criticism and Review: Section 52 allows for the use of copyrighted
material for the purpose of criticism or review, fostering healthy debate and analysis of
existing works.
• Facilitating Research and Education: Limited use of copyrighted material for
research and educational purposes is permitted, promoting knowledge dissemination
and learning.
• Reporting Current Events: News reporting can utilize copyrighted material to a
certain extent, ensuring the free flow of information about current affairs.
• Personal and Private Use: Section 52 allows for some limited personal or private
use of copyrighted material, striking a balance between creator rights and individual
needs.
By allowing these exceptions, Section 52 aims to strike a balance between protecting the rights
of copyright holders and fostering a creative and informed society.

1
Phonographic Performance Limited v. Lookpart Exhibitions and Events Private Limited, 2022
2
Scaria, Arul George, Reading Sec. 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act 1957
3
Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957: An Analysis of Fair Dealing Doctrine, JusIP, jusip.in
4
Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957
1
 Chapter 2 : Scope of Section 52

Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, outlines exceptions to copyright infringement under the
concept of "fair dealing." While it allows for limited use of copyrighted material without
permission, the precise scope of this provision remains somewhat ambiguous567.
Listed Purposes:
Section 52(1)(a) explicitly mentions specific purposes that constitute fair dealing:
• Research: Limited use for research purposes is allowed.
• Criticism or Review: Use for analysis, critique, or commentary on copyrighted
works is permitted.
• Reporting Current Events: News reporting can utilize copyrighted material to a
certain extent.
• Private or Personal Use: Limited personal or private use is allowed.

Uncertainties and Limitations:

• Unclear Definition: The absence of a clear definition of "fair dealing" within the Act
itself leads to uncertainty. Courts rely on case law and four factors (purpose, nature of
work, amount used, market impact) but these may not provide definitive answers in all
situations.
• Subjectivity of Factors: The four factors used to assess fair dealing can be
subjective, creating a grey area for borderline cases.
• Technological Advancements: The digital age presents new challenges. Concepts
like online criticism, parodies, and educational use of online resources raise questions
about the applicability of Section 52.

International Comparison:
• US Fair Use: The US Copyright Act has a similar fair use provision, but with a more
extensive body of case law, potentially offering greater clarity.

Essence of Section 52
Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957 doesn't provide a direct definition of itself. However, it
functions by listing out acts that are not infringements of copyright, specifically those that fall
under the umbrella of "fair dealing."
In essence, Section 52 outlines the exceptions to copyright infringement for certain uses of
copyrighted material. These exceptions allow for limited use without the copyright holder's
permission, as long as the use falls within the scope of "fair dealing" as defined by the courts.

5
https://copyright.gov.in/
6
Fair Dealing and Scope of Section 52, Indian Copyright Act, 1957, www.linkedin.com
7
Applicability of section 52 of the copyrights act to specific works, www.lexology.com
2
 Chapter 3 : Interpretation of Section 52

Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, is a crucial provision that outlines the concept of fair
dealing in India. While it grants copyright holders exclusive rights over their works, it also
recognizes exceptions that allow for limited use of copyrighted material without their
permission. However, interpreting the scope of fair dealing under Section 52 can be challenging
due to its inherent ambiguity89.
Here's a breakdown of key aspects to consider when interpreting Section 52:

Four Fair Dealing Factors:

The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. vs. Eastern India Motion Pictures Association Ltd.
(2007): This case clarified that playing music in public without permission, even for
commercial purposes, could be fair dealing if it falls within the exceptions outlined in Section
52(1)(za) (religious ceremonies or official ceremonies). Here, the court balanced the right of
the copyright holder to control public performance with the social purpose of religious and
official ceremonies.
While Section 52 doesn't define "fair dealing" itself, courts rely on four factors to assess
whether a particular use falls within its scope10:
1. The Purpose and Character of the Use: Courts assess whether the use is
transformative or merely commercial exploitation of the original work.
2. The Nature of the Copyrighted Work: published vs. unpublished, factual vs.
creative, can influence the fair dealing assessment.
3. The Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used: Courts consider whether only
a small, non-essential portion is used or if a substantial and critical part is taken.
4. The Effect of the Use upon the Potential Market for or Value of the Copyrighted
Work: The impact of the use on the copyright holder's potential market or ability to
profit from their work is a crucial factor.

3.1 Case Studies on Section 52

Case Studies on Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957: Fair Dealing in Action
Section 52 of the Copyright Act outlines the concept of fair dealing, allowing limited use of
copyrighted material without permission for specific purposes. However, the lack of a clear
definition necessitates a case-by-case analysis based on the four fair dealing factors. Here's a
breakdown of two landmark cases that illustrate how courts have interpreted Section 52:

8
Interpretation of Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957 - Maheshwari & Co. - Legal Consultants
9
Exception To Infringement Of Copyright Section 52 Of The Copyright Act, 1957 - Copyright - India
10
Societies Registration Act (1960) vs. Santa Cruz Electronics Export Association (2001)
3
1. WWF India & Ors. vs. Ramdas Bhat & Ors. (2013)11:
• Facts: This case involved the use of photographs of wildlife by the World Wildlife
Fund (WWF) in their calendars and other publications. Ramdas Bhat, a wildlife
photographer, claimed copyright infringement as the WWF had used his photographs
without permission. The WWF argued fair dealing for the purpose of promoting
wildlife conservation.
• Judgment: The court ruled in favor of the WWF, considering the four fair dealing
factors
Significance: This case highlights fair dealing for educational and public interest purposes. It
emphasizes that using a low-resolution version of a copyrighted work can strengthen a fair
dealing argument.

2. CA Anuradha Bali vs. MR. Kalyani (2000)12:

• Facts: This case involved the publication of a biographical sketch about a lawyer (Mr.
Kalyani) in a legal journal edited by CA Anuradha Bali. The biographical sketch
included excerpts from Mr. Kalyani's judgments without permission. Mr. Kalyani sued
for copyright infringement.
• Judgment: The court ruled in favor of CA Bali
Significance: This case emphasizes fair dealing for purposes of criticism, review, and
reporting, especially when using excerpts from factual works.

3. The Citizens Forum vs. Shri Dabur India Ltd. (2008)13:

• Facts: The Citizens Forum, a public interest group, published a critique of a
marketing campaign by Dabur India Ltd., which allegedly used misleading
advertisements. The critique included excerpts from Dabur's advertisements. Dabur
sued for copyright infringement.
• Judgment: The court ruled in favor of The Citizens Forum
Significance: This case highlights fair dealing for criticism and public interest purposes, even
when using excerpts from creative works, as long as the use is transformative.

These cases showcase how Indian courts interpret Section 52 and the four fair dealing factors
in various contexts. Remember, it's always advisable to consult with a legal professional for
specific guidance on fair dealing in your situation.

11
WWF India & Ors. vs. Ramdas Bhat & Ors. (2013)
12
CA Anuradha Bali vs. MR. Kalyani (2000)
13
The Citizens Forum vs. Shri Dabur India Ltd. (2008)
4
 Chapter 4 : Impact of Section 52

Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, has a significant impact on the Indian copyright
landscape. Here's a breakdown of its positive and negative aspects, along with its influence on
various stakeholders1415:

Positive Impacts:
• Promotes Creativity and Innovation: Fair dealing allows for limited use of
copyrighted material for purposes like criticism, review, research, and education. This
can stimulate creativity by enabling commentary, analysis, and the creation of
derivative works.
• Dissemination of Knowledge and Information: Fair dealing allows for the use of
copyrighted material for educational purposes and reporting current events. This
facilitates the spread of knowledge and information to the public.
• Public Interest: Fair dealing exceptions can be invoked for public interest purposes,
such as criticizing misleading advertisements or highlighting social issues. This
empowers the public to hold powerful entities accountable.
• Flexibility for Users: Fair dealing offers some flexibility for users who might not be
able to afford to always obtain permission from copyright holders.

Negative Impacts:
• Uncertainty and Ambiguity: The lack of a clear definition for "fair dealing" can lead
to confusion and hinder creativity. Creators and users may be unsure about the
boundaries of permissible use.
• Subjectivity of Fair Dealing Factors: The subjective nature of the four fair dealing
factors can create a grey area, making it difficult to predict how courts might rule in
specific situations. This can discourage users and stifle innovation.
• Potential for Copyright Infringement: The line between fair dealing and copyright
infringement can be blurry, potentially leading to unintentional infringement or
disputes.

Impact on Stakeholders:
• Creators: A well-defined and balanced fair dealing framework can incentivize
content creation by ensuring creators receive proper compensation for their work.
However, ambiguity in fair dealing can make it difficult for creators to control how
their work is used.
• Users: Clear fair dealing guidelines can empower users (students, researchers, critics)
to access and use copyrighted material for legitimate purposes. However, uncertainty

14
Acceptable use of copyrighted material, www.lexology.com
15
Fair Dealing and Scope of Section 52, Indian Copyright Act, 1957., www.linkedin.com
5
 can discourage users from engaging with copyrighted works due to fear of
infringement.
• Copyright Holders: A strong fair dealing framework can encourage creativity and
public discourse around copyrighted works. However, weak or ambiguous fair dealing
provisions can make it difficult for copyright holders to control how their work is used
and potentially reduce their potential revenue.

Examples of Impact:
• Scientific Discoveries: Scientific advancements often rely on researchers building
upon the work of others and accessing vast amounts of data and prior research findings.
Open access to scientific publications can accelerate breakthroughs.
• Technological Innovation: The development of new technologies like 3D printing or
artificial intelligence benefits from open access to research findings and collaboration
among researchers across the globe.
• Artistic Expression: Musicians can be inspired by different musical genres, writers
by diverse literary traditions, and artists by various visual art movements. Exposure to
these cultural touchstones fuels artistic innovation and expression.

6
 Chapter 5 : Criticisms and Debates

While Section 52 of the Copyright Act plays a vital role in allowing fair dealing of copyrighted
material in India, it faces several criticisms due to its ambiguities and potential
shortcomings161718. Here's a breakdown of the key critiques:

Lack of Clear Definition:

• The absence of a clear definition for "fair dealing" within the Act itself creates
uncertainty. Courts rely on case law and the four fair dealing factors, but these may not
always provide definitive answers, especially in borderline cases.
• This ambiguity can hinder creativity and innovation as creators and users may be unsure
about the boundaries of permissible use.

Subjectivity of Fair Dealing Factors:

• The four factors used to assess fair dealing (purpose, nature of work, amount used,
market impact) can be subjective. This subjectivity can create a grey area, making it
difficult to predict how courts might rule in specific situations.
• For example, determining the "transformative" nature of a use or the "substantiality" of
the portion used can be open to interpretation.

Inadequate Protection for Creators:

• Critics argue that Section 52, in its current form, might tip the scales too far in favor of
users. Overly broad interpretations of fair dealing can potentially reduce the incentive
for creators to produce new works if they feel their work can be used freely without
adequate compensation.
• This can be particularly concerning for creative industries that rely heavily on copyright
protection for revenue generation.

Challenges of the Digital Age:

• The digital landscape presents new challenges that Section 52, drafted in 1957, may not
fully address:
o Online Criticism and Parodies: How much copyrighted material can be used
for online criticism or parody without infringing copyright?
o Educational Use of Online Resources: The use of copyrighted materials in
online educational settings is crucial, but the scope of fair dealing for such use
remains somewhat unclear.

16
A critique of the provisions on Copyright Societies under the Copyright Act, 1957 | SCC Times
17
A CRITIQUE OF COPYRIGHT CRITICISMS Stan J. Liebowitz* INTRODUCTION
18
A Critique of Copyright Criticisms
7
 o Remix Culture and Mashups: The rise of remix culture and mashups, where
copyrighted works are combined to create new works, raises questions about
fair dealing boundaries.

Uncertainties in International Copyright:

• The lack of a clear definition in Section 52 can be contrasted with the US "fair use"
doctrine, which has a more extensive body of case law. This can lead to uncertainties
and potential legal complications when dealing with international copyright issues.
These critiques highlight the need for potential reforms or clarifications to ensure Section 52
effectively balances the rights of creators with the need for fair dealing and access to knowledge
in the digital age.

8
 Chapter 6 : Comparing Section 52 with International Copyright
Laws: Balancing Rights in a Globalized World

The concept of fair dealing, enshrined in Section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, is a
crucial element in balancing the rights of creators with public access to knowledge and
information1920. Here's a comparative analysis of Section 52 with copyright laws in other
countries, highlighting similarities and differences:

Similarities:
• Fair Use/Dealing Exceptions: Many countries, including the US (fair use), UK (fair
dealing), and Canada (fair dealing), have provisions similar to Section 52. These
exceptions allow limited use of copyrighted material without permission for specific
purposes like criticism, commentary, news reporting, research, teaching, and
scholarship.
• Multi-Factor Tests: Similar to Section 52's four-factor test (purpose, nature of work,
amount used, market impact), most fair use/dealing doctrines rely on a multi-factor
approach to assess the permissibility of a particular use.

Key Differences:
• Statutory vs. Judge-Made Law: Section 52 is a statutory provision, while fair use in
the US is primarily judge-made law, evolving through court decisions. This can lead to
more specific and nuanced interpretations in countries with a strong body of fair use
case law.
• Specificity and Illustrative Examples: Compared to Section 52's ambiguity, some
countries (e.g., US) have developed a richer body of case law with illustrative examples
for various fair use scenarios, providing greater clarity for creators and users.
• Scope and Flexibility: The scope and flexibility of fair use/dealing exceptions can
vary across countries. For instance, the US fair use doctrine is considered broader than
fair dealing in some countries.

International Copyright Agreements:

• Berne Convention: India, along with most countries, is a signatory to the Berne
Convention, which sets minimum protection standards for creators. However, the
Convention allows for limitations and exceptions like fair dealing, providing flexibility
for national copyright laws.
• TRIPS Agreement: The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights (TRIPS) also allows member states to implement limitations and
exceptions within their copyright frameworks.

19
Introduction to International Copyright Law, www.copyrightlaws.com
20
Applicability of section 52 of the copyrights act to specific works, www.lexology.com
9
Challenges for India:
• Clarity and Predictability: The lack of a clear definition for "fair dealing" in Section
52 creates uncertainty for creators and users, potentially hindering creativity and access
to knowledge.
• International Compatibility: Ambiguity in Section 52 can lead to complexities when
dealing with international copyright issues.
• Adapting to the Digital Age: Both international copyright frameworks and national
laws need to evolve to address challenges posed by the digital environment, such as
online criticism, educational uses, and remix culture.

The Way Forward:

• Legislative Reforms: Considering international best practices, India could explore
amending Section 52 to provide a clearer definition of "fair dealing" and offer more
specific guidelines for the digital age.
• Judicial Clarification: Courts can continue to refine the interpretation of Section 52
through landmark judgments, providing more specific guidance for fair dealing in
various contexts.
• Harmonization Efforts: International collaboration to harmonize copyright laws,
while acknowledging national specificities, can create a more predictable and balanced
global copyright environment.

10
 Chapter 7 : Enforcement and Remedies

In India, copyright infringement occurs when someone uses a copyrighted work without
permission from the copyright owner. The Copyright Act, 1957, outlines various mechanisms
for copyright owners to enforce their rights and seek remedies in case of infringement2122.
Here's a breakdown of the key enforcement measures and remedies available:

Civil Remedies:
• Injunctions: Copyright owners can seek court orders to prevent further infringement.
This can be particularly useful to stop ongoing or imminent infringement activities.
• Damages: Copyright owners can sue for compensation for the financial losses
suffered due to the infringement. Damages can be based on lost profits, royalty fees, or
the infringer's gains.
• Accounts of Profits: In some cases, courts may order the infringer to disclose and
surrender all profits earned from the infringing activity.
• Delivery Up: The court can order the infringer to deliver infringing copies or
materials to the copyright owner for destruction or other disposal.

Criminal Remedies:
• Imprisonment: Copyright infringement can be a criminal offense punishable with
imprisonment for a minimum of six months and a maximum of three years.
• Fine: The Copyright Act prescribes a fine of at least Rs. 50,000 which can extend up
to Rs. 2,00 raids and seizures: Police officers have the authority, under specific
conditions, to raid premises and seize infringing copies or materials.

Administrative Remedies:
• Import Control: The Registrar of Copyrights can prohibit the import of infringing
copies into India.

Important Considerations:
• Burden of Proof: The copyright owner typically bears the burden of proving
ownership and infringement.
• Limitation Period: There is a limitation period of three years from the date of
infringement to file a lawsuit for copyright infringement.
• Jurisdiction: District courts have jurisdiction to hear copyright infringement cases.

21
In brief: copyright infringement and remedies in India, www.lexology.com
22
Copyright Act, 1957 : Meaning, Features, Remedies and FAQs
11
Additional Points:
• Copyright Registration: While registration is not mandatory for copyright protection
in India, it offers certain advantages in enforcement. A registered copyright provides
prima facie evidence of ownership and helps streamline the process of filing
infringement suits.
• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Copyright owners and infringers can
explore ADR options like mediation or arbitration to resolve disputes outside of court.
This can be faster and less expensive than litigation.

7.1 Mechanisms for Enforcing Section 52

Section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, deals with fair dealing, which allows for limited
use of copyrighted material without permission for specific purposes. However, enforcing
Section 52 itself isn't the primary concern. The enforcement mechanisms come into play when
there's a dispute about whether a particular use of copyrighted material falls under fair dealing
or constitutes infringement. Here's a breakdown of how enforcement works in such scenarios:

The Burden of Proof:

• The burden of proving fair dealing generally falls on the person who is using the
copyrighted material. This means they need to demonstrate that their use satisfies the
four fair dealing factors enshrined in Section 52:
o Purpose and character of the use: Was the use for criticism, review,
research, education, or private study?
o Nature of the copyrighted work: Was it factual or creative? Published or
unpublished?
o Amount and substantiality of the portion used: How much of the
copyrighted work was used? Was it a significant portion or just a small excerpt?
o Effect of the use upon the potential market for the copyrighted work:
Does the use affect the potential market value of the original work?

Dispute Resolution Mechanisms:

• Courts: If there's a disagreement about whether a use constitutes fair dealing, the
copyright owner can sue the alleged infringer in court. The court will then assess the
case based on the four fair dealing factors and issue a judgment. This can be a lengthy
and expensive process.
• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Copyright owners and alleged infringers
can explore ADR options like mediation or arbitration to resolve the dispute outside of
court. This can be faster and less expensive than litigation. An ADR expert can help
them reach a mutually agreeable solution.

12
Role of Copyright Societies:
• Copyright societies like the Indian Performing Right Society (IPRS) and the
Phonographic Performance Limited (PPL) can play a role in mediating disputes related
to fair dealing, especially when it involves their members' works.

13
 Chapter 8 : Future Implications and Challenges

Section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, plays a vital role in balancing the rights of
creators with public access to knowledge in the digital age. However, the evolving digital
landscape presents both opportunities and challenges for fair dealing232425. Here's a breakdown
of the potential future implications and challenges:

Opportunities:
• Facilitating Innovation: A clear and adaptable fair dealing framework can encourage
remix culture, mashups, and other forms of creative reuse of copyrighted material,
fostering innovation in the digital age.
• Enhancing Educational Resources: Fair dealing can allow for the creation and
dissemination of educational resources that incorporate copyrighted materials,
enriching online learning experiences.
• Promoting Open Access: A balanced approach to fair dealing can support open
access initiatives, making knowledge and information more widely accessible to the
public.

Challenges:
• Technological Advancements: New technologies like artificial intelligence and
deepfakes raise questions about the boundaries of fair dealing and potential misuse of
copyrighted content.
• Orphan Works: The digital age presents challenges in identifying and locating
copyright holders of orphaned works, making it difficult to determine fair dealing
permissions.
• International Copyright Issues: The ambiguity of Section 52 can create
complexities when dealing with international copyright issues in the digital world.
• Balancing Interests: Striking the right balance between protecting creators' rights
and allowing for fair dealing in the digital age remains an ongoing challenge.

The Future of Copyright:

The future of copyright protection hinges on its ability to adapt to the ever-changing digital
landscape. By striking a balance between the rights of creators and the public interest in access
to knowledge, a sustainable copyright framework can be created. This framework should foster
creativity, innovation, and ensure fair compensation for creators in the digital age.

23
The Evolution of Copyright in the Digital Age: Challenges and Future Perspectives
24
(PDF) The past and the future of copyright law: technological change
25
Authorship of AI Generated Works under the Copyright Act, 1957: An Analytical Study
14
Additional Considerations:
• The role of copyright collectives in managing and enforcing copyright on behalf of
creators.
• The impact of open access initiatives on the dissemination of knowledge and
copyrighted material.
• The potential benefits and drawbacks of alternative licensing models like Creative
Commons.
By understanding the challenges and opportunities presented by the digital age, stakeholders
can work together to create a more robust and balanced copyright ecosystem for the future.

8.1 Potential Revisions to Section 52

Potential Revisions to Section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act

Section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, plays a vital role in enabling fair dealing of
copyrighted material. However, its ambiguity and lack of specific guidance for the digital age
can create uncertainties for creators and users26. Here's a breakdown of some potential revisions
to consider:

1. Clarifying the Definition of "Fair Dealing":

• A clear definition of "fair dealing" could be incorporated into Section 52, outlining the
key factors to consider when assessing fair use (purpose and character of use, nature of
the work, amount and substantiality of portion used, impact on the market).
• Examples of fair dealing in specific contexts (e.g., criticism, education, parody) could
be provided to offer more practical guidance.

2. Addressing New Technologies:

• The revised Section 52 could explicitly address the use of copyrighted material in
relation to emerging technologies like AI, machine learning, and deepfakes. This could
clarify the permissible extent of using copyrighted material for training AI models or
creating parodies.

3. Orphan Works Provisions:

• The Act could introduce provisions for dealing with orphaned works. This might
involve creating a registry to identify and locate copyright holders or establishing a
mechanism for obtaining permission for fair dealing uses of orphaned works.

26
Overview of Changes to the Indian Copyright Law
15
4. Time-Sensitive Factors:
• The revised Section 52 could consider incorporating time-sensitivity as a factor in fair
dealing assessments. For instance, the use of a recently published work might be
considered less fair than using a work that's been around for a longer period.

5. Multi-Factor Balancing Test:

• While retaining the core four-factor test, the revised Section 52 could acknowledge the
potential for additional factors to be considered depending on the specific
circumstances of a case. This allows for a more nuanced approach.

6. International Best Practices:

• Revisions could be informed by studying fair dealing provisions in other jurisdictions
like the US (fair use) or the UK (fair dealing), drawing inspiration from successful
elements in those frameworks.

7. Technological Solutions:
• The government could explore encouraging the development of technological tools to
help identify copyright holders and streamline permission processes for fair dealing,
particularly for orphaned works.

8. Education and Awareness:

• Public awareness campaigns could be launched to educate creators and users about
copyright and fair dealing principles in the digital age. This can help foster a more
respectful online environment.
By considering these potential revisions, India can strive for a clearer and more adaptable fair
dealing framework that fosters creativity, innovation, and ensures fair access to knowledge in
the digital age.

16
 Chapter 9 : Conclusion

Conclusion: The Future of Fair Dealing in the Digital Age

Section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act plays a critical role in balancing the rights of creators
with public access to knowledge. However, the digital age presents both challenges and
opportunities for fair dealing.

Challenges:
• Technological advancements raise new questions about fair use in the context of AI,
machine learning, and deepfakes.
• Orphan works pose difficulties in obtaining permissions for fair dealing.
• The ambiguity of Section 52 creates uncertainties for creators and users.

Opportunities:
• A clear and adaptable fair dealing framework can encourage innovation and remix
culture in the digital age.
• Fair dealing can support open access initiatives and educational resource creation.
• Technological solutions can help streamline permission processes for fair dealing.

Looking Forward:
• Potential revisions to Section 52 could include clarifying the definition of fair dealing,
addressing new technologies, and incorporating provisions for orphan works.
• Balancing creator rights with public access remains a key consideration.
• Public education and awareness campaigns are crucial for a healthy digital copyright
ecosystem.

The future of fair dealing hinges on its ability to adapt to the evolving digital landscape.
By acknowledging the challenges and opportunities, India can strive for a robust framework
that fosters creativity, innovation, and ensures fair access to knowledge in the digital age.

17
 Webliography & Bibliography

1. Ku R S R, Sun J & Fan Y, Does Copyright Law promote creativity? An empirical

analysis of copyright’s bounty, Vanderbilt Law Review, 1669, 62 (6) (2009) 1170.

2. Rai P, Sharma R K, Jain P K & Singh A, (eds.) Transforming Dimension of IPR:

Challenges for New Age Libraries, Madhu K S & Gagan K, Copyright Fair Use and
Libraries, (National Law University Delhi Press, New Delhi), (2015) 126.

3. Aswath L & Reddy A N M, Copyright law and the academic libraries: A perspective,
Trends in Information Management, 8 (2) (2012) 111.

4. Bansal A K, Public interest in intellectual property laws, Journal of the Indian Law
Institute, 55 ( 4) (2013) 476.

5. Sharma A, Indian perspective of fair dealing under Copyright Law: Lex Lata or Lex
Ferenda?, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 14 ( 2009) 523.

6. Mondaq.com/India/Copyright

7. https://blog.ipleaders .in

8. https://suranaandsurana.com

9. https://www.lexisnexis.in

18
Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957, serves a critical purpose within the Indian copyright framework. It
carves out exceptions to the exclusive rights granted to copyright holders, allowing for the limited use of
copyrighted material without their permission . This concept, known as fair dealing, aims to achieve a
crucial balance: • Protecting Creators' Rights: Copyright grants creators exclusive rights over their original
works, allowing them to control how their work is used and potentially benefit financially from it. This
incentivizes creativity and ensures creators are fairly compensated for their efforts. • Promoting Creativity
and Public Interest: However, a rigid copyright system could stifle creativity by hindering the use of existing
works for... (only first 800 chars shown)

Analysis complete. Our feedback is listed below in printable form. Some of the items have been
truncated or removed to provide better print compatibility.

Alerts

Research Paper With No Works Cited List?

You marked this as a 'Research Paper' but no Works Cited, Bibliograpy, or similar list of sources could be
found. If this actually is a research paper be sure to include a list of sources for the paper in your final draft.

Plagiarism Detection
Original Work
Originality: 85%

Your writing demonstrates no signs of plagiarism. Great work!

More info on our originality scoring process (http://www.PaperRater.com/page/plagiarism-detection) .

Upgrade to premium (http://www.PaperRater.com/pricing) to

see which phrases were found to be un-original

Spelling

Spelling Suggestions
"

Error Suggestion

permission permission.

Grammar