RAM MANCHANDA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGMENT -

(2.) HOW far law protects creative aesthetic expression of an artist 7 Is the intellectual property of an artist governed by the game norms as commercial property ? Where does the freedom (of expression) of the autnor and, where does the Director begin ? What is the scope and width of section 57 of the Copyright Act, 1957? These are the questions raised in Mannu Bhandari's suit against M/s. Kala Vikas Pictures (Pvt.) Ltd. and its producer and director. Kala Vikas has produced motion picture 'Samay Ki Dhara' under assignment of filming rights of her novel 'Aap Ka Bunty.' Her complaint is of the multilation and distortion of the novel. She pleads for permanent injunction against its screening and exhibition. Although many authors complain of sueh distortions, few have sought judicial protection. Hence, there is no precedent of any law court to guide the film industry.

(3.) SECTION 57 falls in Chapter XII of the Act concerning civil remedies. SECTION 55 provides for certain remedies where there is infringement of copyright, SECTION 56 provides for protection of separate rights comprising the copyright in any work. Than comes SECTION 37, providing for authors' special rights, and the remedies for violation of these rights. This is a statutory recognition of the intellectual property of the author and special care with which the intellectual property is protected. Under section 57 the author shall have a right to claim the authorship of the work. He has also a right to restrain the infringement or to claim damages for the infringement. These rights are independent of author's copyright and the remedies open to the author under section 55. In other words section 57 confers additional rights on the author of a literary work as compared to the owner of a general copyright. The special protection of the intellectual property is emphasised by the fact that the remedies of a restraint order or damages can be claimed "even after the assignment either wholly or partially of the said copyright." SECTION 57 thus clearly over-rides the terms of the Contract of assignment of the copyright. To put it differently, the contract of assignment would be read subject to the provisions of SECTION 57 and the terms of contract cannot negate the special rights and remedies guaranteed by section 57. The Contract of Assignment will have to be so construed as to be consistent with section 57. The assignee of a copyright cannot claim any rights or immunities based on the contract which are inconsistent with the provisions of section 57.