This article has been written by Sonniya S Katyal while she was interning at Le Droit India.

ABSTRACT 

The article seeks to analyse the concept of copyright societies and their legal position in case of an infringement of a copyright of an author who has vested his rights to the society. The general legal position is such that a suit for copyright infringement can only be instituted by the owner or author of such copyright and not any other third party, however thus arises the question of copyright societies as statutorily provided for under the Copyright Act, 1957. The locus standi of such societies raises to be a pertinent question in light of the rise in cases of infringement of copyright as to whether the right to sue in such a case vests only with the owner or author or does it also vest with the copyright society. 

KEYWORDS

Copyright Act, 1957, copyright societies, copyright infringement, locus standi 

INTRODUCTION 

Intellectual property rights have been historically present ever since ancient times, however the global trend of the 1990s, which included liberalization, privatization and globalization, propelled the intellectual property rights scenario. Protection of intellectual works is not only a domestic affair but also includes involvement of key international players, which seeks to accumulate royalties from the use of such works. One such element of intellectual property rights is copyright. As described by the World Intellectual Property Organisation, copyright is the rights that authors have over their literary and creative works. These rights extend to all written and musical compositions, artwork such as paintings movies, computing devices, databases, pictorial advertisements, geographical, and technical sketches. Copyright extends to the concept of the protection for creators to prevent infringement and foster development and improvement while also considering the broader public. 

The evolution of copyright law in India can be seen through the trajectory of statutory laws governing the concept. Starting with the earliest Indian law although heavily influenced by the colonial regime regarding copyright i.e. The Copyright Act of 1847 moving on to the Copyright Act of 1914 and eventually the current statute in force ie. The Copyright Act of 1957 came into being. The latter governs the present day scenario of voluntary license of copyright which seeks to balance the interests of the author via protection of copyright by rewarding and protecting creativity and the interests of the general public at large which can make use of the copyrighted works through gaining of license of the same.

It may also be said that the copyright law, as we understand it, is of relatively recent origin. Though the concept of the existence of property cannot be doubted (Social Contract Theory), but the sheer creation of human efforts as a “property” is of recent origin—traceable to the Industrial Revolution. The history of copyright shows that copyright has seen many ups and downs since the invention of the printing press. Unlike other IPs (Patents, Trademarks, etc.), the copyright’s struggle is like that of the Cinderella sisters. It received step-motherly treatment but when it got the recognition, it also got the highest pedestal under the IP umbrella.

The rights vested with the author of copyright are a bundle of rights consisting of inter alia right of reproduction of copyrighted material, communication to the public, translating and adaptations of the material which may be licensed to the licensee for his use if the author deems fit. However, this volition of the author to hand over his rights may be handed over to copyright societies. 

LEGAL FRAMEWORK GOVERNING COPYRIGHT SOCIETIES IN INDIA

A copyright society is a registered collective administrative body which seeks to collectively protect and administer the affairs regarding use of copyrighted material. Collectively administering copyrights ensures better protection of the interests of the authors instead of them singularly keeping a record of those who have furnished a license for the use of copyrighted material along with these societies maintaining international relations as well to get proper economic value, which is due to the authors for their creativity.  Copyright societies are mentioned under Section 33 of the Copyright Act, 1957 but are not defined and do not provide for a clear cut ambit of their existence. 

The functions to be carried out by such societies encapsulate the function of licensing the copyrighted material to the licensee, collecting royalties on behalf of the authors as well as remunerating the authors for their works post deducting administration costs or overheads. 

The rights of the author, which the act seeks to vest in the copyright society, are provided under Section 18 of the Copyright Act, 1957. These include the right to assign the copyrighted material either partially or wholly to any person along with other miscellaneous rights such as to right to reproduce such material, right to communicate to the public etc. 

CONCEPT OF LOCUS STANDI IN INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM 

The term locus standi  is a Latin term, general meaning of  which is “place of standing”. Concise Oxford English Dictionary, defines “locus standi” as the right or capacity to bring an action or to appear in a court. Traditional view of “locus standi” has been, that person who is aggrieved or affected alone has the standing before court i.e. to say he only has a right to move court for seeking justice. Later, Supreme Court, with justice-oriented approach initiated a paradigm shift and relaxed the strict rule with regard to “locus standi”, allowing any person from society not related to cause of action to approach the court, bona fide seeking justice for those who could not themselves approach the court.

This encapsulates the principle of locus standi i.e. whether a particular party has the legal standing to knock the doors of court and seek remedy regarding his legal grievance. There has been a paradigm shift in Indian jurisprudence regarding the locus standi being earlier only restricted to the aggrieved parties and subsequently by way of coming into practice of the public interest litigation (PIL) which was an attempt of the Indian judicial system to make justice accessible to all stratas of society despite litigation being inaccessible due to high costs, inordinate time delays etc by allowing NGOs and public spirited individuals to approach the courts on behalf of the aggrieved parties. 

The general principle regarding locus standi under Intellectual Property Rights law pertains to only those aggrieved by infringement of their copyright are vested with the right to sue the person who has used the copyrighted material without due license. 

LOCUS STANDI OF COPYRIGHT SOCIETIES : LEGAL ANALYSIS 

However, in stark contrast to the general principle arises the question of whether the copyright societies who are handed over the administration of licensing of copyrighted material are vested with the locus standi to sue a person who infringes the rights of the author. The explicitly mentioned functions of the societies given under the Handbook on Copyright Law published by the legislature include giving license, collecting royalties and remunerating authors however this does not include the right to sue for infringement. On one hand of this debate lies the contention that a society is vested with the power to only interact and manage affairs with the licensees and not those who have infringed the copyright and only the author of the copyright can sue for infringement. On the other hand, since the society is vested with rights akin to that of author, it may be interpreted to hold the right to sue for infringement. 

The erstwhile legal position on the basis of a decision by the Delhi High Court was that – it must be pointed out that the authority that an owner gives to a copyright society for the collection of fees relates to the fees in respect of the licences granted by the copyright society. The authority does not extend to collecting fees from those persons to whom the copyright society has not granted any licences. To illustrate this point, let us assume that an owner enters into an agreement with a copyright society giving exclusive authorisation to the copyright society to grant licences and to collect fees in respect thereof as per the tariff of the copyright society. Let us assume further that the copyright society grants licences to three persons — A, B and C. The copyright society in such a situation would be well within its rights to demand fees from A, B and C in respect of the licences granted by it to them. In case, A, B or C do not pay the fees as contemplated under the licences granted by the copyright society on behalf of the owner, it may be argued that the copyright society can institute proceedings, including the filing of a civil suit for recovery of the fees due under the licences granted to A, B or C. The copyright society would not have any authority to file a suit against such persons either for infringement or for recovery of fees or damages. That right is in the exclusive domain of the owner or an exclusive licencee. A copyright society is neither. The reason for the difference can be easily discerned because where the copyright society seeks to recover/collect fees from persons to whom licenses have been granted, it is doing so in terms of the licenses. On the other hand, where the copyright society would attempt to recover fees/damages from persons to whom no licenses have been granted, it would be doing so on the basis of infringement. The civil remedy for infringement is restricted to an owner or an exclusive licensee. The copyright society cannot institute a suit for infringement of a copyright and, therefore, a copyright society would not be in a position to file a suit seeking injunction, damages, accounts or other civil remedies in respect of persons, such as the defendants, who have allegedly infringed the copyrights of the owners.

The Supreme Court however took a different stand and in the case of Entertainment Network (India) Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries Ltd., opined that Chapter VII deals with copyright society the concept whereof was incorporated in the Act so as to enable an author to commercially exploit his intellectual property by a widespread dispersal in a regulated manner. It for all intent and purport steps into the shoes of the author. The society grants licence on behalf of the author, it files litigation on his behalf, both for the purpose of enforcement as also protection of the enforcement of his right. It not only pays royalty to the author but is entitled to distribute the amount collected by it amongst its members. Section 34 providing for administration of rights of owners by a copyright society for all intent and purport creates a virtual agency so as to enable the society to act on behalf of the owner. The civil remedies for infringement of copyright as envisaged under Section 55 of the Act can also be enforced by the society. The right of the author of a copyright vis-à-vis the society, thus, may be exercised in almost all walks of life from the “radio stations” to a small “hairdressing salon”.

Thus, in light of the Supreme Court’s decision, the current legal position regarding locus standi of copyright societies may be established ie. the societies are vested with a virtual agency which empowers them to file a suit on behalf of the owners / authors of the copyrighted material in cases of infringement of their copyright. 

CONCLUSION 

A registered copyright society does have locus standi to file copyright infringement suits, as it acts on behalf of its members under express authorization through assignments or licenses. Statutory provisions, such as those under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957, clearly empower such societies to enforce rights and take legal action against infringement. Judicial precedents further affirm this standing, recognizing the practical necessity of collective enforcement in protecting the interests of multiple copyright owners. Therefore, when properly authorized, a copyright society is fully competent in law to initiate infringement proceedings in its own name or on behalf of its members.