SUBMITTED TO: Mr. Aditya Upadhyay

Copyright

SUBMITTED BY: Swati Joshi

M.F.M. 3rd Sem

NIFT

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

ASSIGNMENT: 2 cases studies on Copyright.

Copyright is a right given by the law to

creators of literary, dramatic, musical and

artistic works and procedures of

cinematograph films and sound recordings.

….Copyright in Music

• is the Exclusive right a creator of a piece of

music has, to prevent others from using it

without his/her permission.

• is also the permission a non-creator of music

gets from the creator of a piece of music to use

it.

CASE-1

“T-series Vs Guruji.com”

The Case MUSIC PIRACY

GURUJI.COM

T-SERIES

GURUJI.COM Vs T-SERIES

DMCA ACT

• T-Series which stands for Trishul Series is a music label owned by the company Super Casettes Limited (SCL).

• Guruji.com founded by two IITian graduates in 2006. indigenously made search engine.

• Indian music industry is a consortium of 142 companies .

• Piracy: Most serious problem faced by Indian Music Industry.

• Guruji.com, a Sequoia Capital funded search engine focused on Music Search, allows users to locate and play music from sites like Songs.pk, MusicPlug.in, PZ10.com and BollyMobile.in.

• Anurag Dod, founder and CEO, Guruji.com has been arrested in Bangalore on charges of making available copies of the copyrighted musical works owned by T-Series (Super Cassettes Industries).

• Digital Millennium Copyright Act was passed

in 1998

• Under this act, it is a crime to produce

technology, tool s and services which fudge

the access to copyrighted works.

• DMCA also take care to amplify the penalties

for copyright infringement on the internet.

• Guruji.com removed the search links for music and songs from its site. • Shut down its music search site.

OUTCOME

CASE-2

“Rogers Vs Koons”

• Photographer Art Rogers shot a

photograph of a couple holding

a line of puppies in a row and

sold it for use in greeting cards

and similar products.

Internationally, renowned artist Jeff

Koons in the process of creating an

exhibit on the banality of everyday

items, ran across Rodgers’

photograph and used it to create a set

of statues based on the image.

• Upon discovering the copy, Rodgers sued Koons for copyright.

Koons responded by claiming fair use by parody.

• The court found the similarities between the 2 images too close, and that a

“typical person” would be able to recognize the copy.

• Koon’s defense was rejected under the argument that he could have used a

more generic source to make the same statement — without copying

Roger’s work. Koons was forced to pay a monetary settlement to Rodgers.

OUTCOME

THANK

YOU