The Copyright Law in India protects the rights of creators for their original works, like books, art, music, and movies. It sets rules for registering, protecting, and enforcing copyrights. Section 62 is a key part of this law, focusing on where people can file court cases for copyright infringement. This section helps make it easier for creators to seek justice when someone copies their work without permission, ensuring the court process is simple and fair. Section 62 of Copyright Act was added to overcome limits in regular civil court rules, letting creators file lawsuits in places convenient for them. This shows the law’s aim to support creators, who often face copying across different places. This article explains the meaning, purpose, landmark judgements, and impact of Section 62 of Copyright Act.
Step into the future of legal expertise! Join our Advanced Certification Program in Intellectual Property Law, created by The Legal School in collaboration with Khaitan & Co. Designed for fresh law graduates and professionals, this unique course boosts your legal career. Don’t miss this opportunity—enquire today to secure your spot!
Section 62 of Copyright Act
In order to understand Section 62 of Copyright Act, we need to look into the definition given in bare act which is divided into parts and are simplified below:
Any lawsuit or civil case about copyright infringement or other rights under this Act must be filed in a district court with jurisdiction.
For this section, a “district court with jurisdiction” includes a court where the person filing the lawsuit lives, works, or runs a business at the time of filing, even if other laws, like the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, say something different. If multiple people file together, any one of their locations counts.
The second part uses a “non-obstante” clause, meaning it overrules conflicting rules in other laws, like the Code of Civil Procedure. In simple terms, Section 62 lets creators file cases in courts where they live or work, not just where the infringer is or where the copying happened.
Application of Section 62 of Copyright Act in Intellectual Property Disputes
Section 62 also applies to related issues, like passing off or design copying, when combined with copyright claims. In World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. v. M/S Reshma Collection (2014), the Delhi High Court used Section 62 for a case involving both trademarks and copyrights, allowing the case to be filed where the creator’s business was.
In M/S RSPL Ltd. v. Mukesh Sharma & Anr. (2016), the Calcutta High Court dealt with cases involving copying across multiple places, including online, and supported the creator’s right and the rights of a copyright owner to use Section 62.
Learn about the Nature of Copyright
Purpose of Section 62 of Copyright Act
The purpose of Section 62 of Copyright Act is to make it easier for creators to get justice. Before this section, creators had to follow the Code of Civil Procedure’s rules, which usually meant filing cases where the infringer lived or where the copying happened. This was tough, especially if the infringer was far away or in multiple places, making creators hesitant to sue.
Section 62 changes this by letting creators file cases where they live or work. It recognizes that copying, especially online, can happen anywhere, so creators shouldn’t have to travel far to fight infringers. This rule stops infringers from gaining an unfair edge by forcing creators to go to inconvenient courts. Courts have said this protects creators from extra burdens.
This section also supports the Copyright Act’s bigger goal of encouraging creativity by making it easier to enforce rights. Without this flexibility, smaller creators with limited money might give up on their claims, which would weaken the law’s protection.
How It Differs from the Code of Civil Procedure
To understand Section 62, compare it to Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). Under Section 20, lawsuits are usually filed where the defendant lives, works, or where the problem happened. If the defendant doesn’t live in India and objects, the court might need special permission to move forward, which adds complexity.
Section 62, however, focuses on the creator’s convenience. The word “include” in its second part expands court options, letting creators file where they live or work, no matter where the infringer is or where the copying occurred. This overrules stricter CPC rules but doesn’t replace them entirely but adds an extra option for creators.
This difference helps lawyers choose the best court when filing cases, making the process faster and avoiding delays over where to file.
Learn what are the punishments for copyright infringement.
Judicial Interpretation of Section 62 of Copyright Act
Courts in India have played a pivotal role in interpreting and applying Section 62 of Copyright Act, often clarifying its boundaries through landmark judgments. These decisions have shaped how the section is invoked in practice.
Early Interpretations and Expansion of Jurisdiction
In Glaxo Operations U.K. v. Samrat Pharmaceuticals (1990), the Delhi High Court said creators could file cases where they live or work, focusing on their convenience. This set an early tone for the section as a tool to help creators.
In Exphar SA & Anr v. Eupharma Laboratories Ltd & Anr (2004), the Supreme Court explained that the word “include” in Section 62 expands court options beyond CPC rules, making it easier for creators to enforce their rights.
Balancing Plaintiff Convenience with Defendant Rights
In Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia (2015), the Supreme Court used a rule called Heydon’s mischief rule to interpret Section 62. It said that Section 62 of Copyright Act helps creators but it shouldn’t be used to unfairly burden defendants. If the copying happened where the creator has a business, like a branch office, the case should be filed there, not at the creator’s main office, to avoid troubling the defendant too much. This ruling limited Section 62’s reach to ensure fairness.
In Caterpillar Inc. v. Kailash Nichani (2002), the Delhi High Court said Section 62 focuses on creators, making infringers travel to their chosen court. But after the Dalia case, courts check if the creator’s chosen court is reasonable.
Read about the role of Copyright in Cyber Law
Implications for Copyright Holders and Litigants
Section 62 is a big help for creators. It lets people and companies in creative fields, like books, movies, or software, enforce their rights without worrying about where the infringer is. This is especially useful today, with online copying happening across states or countries. Filing in a familiar court saves money and effort, encouraging creators to take action.
However, the Dalia ruling adds a limit: creators must show a real connection to the court they choose, and courts may move cases if they think the creator is picking an unfair location. This stops misuse and keeps the process fair.
For defendants, Section 62 might mean traveling to the creator’s court, but this supports the Copyright Act’s goal of protecting creators. Lawyers should advise clients to challenge the chosen court if it seems unfair.
Section 62 only applies within India, as the Copyright Act doesn’t cover other countries. Foreign creators must file in Indian courts where they have a presence or where the copying happens.
Section 62 has led to more copyright cases in cities like Delhi and Mumbai, where many creators are based, making these courts experts in handling such disputes.
Summary
Section 62 of Copyright Act, 1957, is a well-designed rule that helps creators fight copying. By letting them file cases in convenient courts, it removes barriers to justice. Landmark judgements from Exphar to Dalia, have shaped it into a fair tool that protects creators without being too hard on others. For lawyers and legal experts, understanding Section 62 is key to helping clients in copyright disputes, ensuring creativity is protected under the law.
Related Posts
Section 62 of Copyright Act: FAQs
Q1. What is Section 62 of Copyright Act?
Section 62 of Copyright Act, 1957, allows copyright infringement lawsuits to be filed in the court where the plaintiff lives or works, making it easier for them to seek justice.
Q2. What is Section 62 of the CPC?
Section 62 of the CPC does not exist; the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has sections like Section 20 that govern where lawsuits can be filed, usually based on the defendant's location or where the issue arose.
Q3. Does Section 63-A of the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, stipulate an enhanced penalty for second and subsequent convictions?
Yes, Section 63-A of the Copyright Act, 1957, provides for harsher penalties, including higher fines and imprisonment, for second and subsequent copyright infringement convictions.
Q4. What does Section 62 of the Indian Contract Act deal with?
Section 62 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 allows parties to mutually agree to cancel or alter a contract, making the original void.
