University Copying Books for Teaching is Not Copyright Violation

from The Hindu

This is a surprise--and it's bad news for publishers.

Delhi University photocopy shop allowed to resume business as court dismisses suits initiated by three international publishing giants.

Excerpts:

     The Delhi High Court on Friday held that the photocopying of course packs 

     prepared by Delhi University comprising portions from books published by 

     Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press and Taylor & Francis 

     did not amount to infringement of copyright.  

...

     "Copyright, especially in literary works, is thus not an inevitable, divine, or 

     natural right that confers on authors the absolute ownership of their creations. 

     It is designed rather to stimulate activity and progress in the arts for the

     intellectual enrichment of the public," said Justice Endlaw.

...

     "It is unfortunate that the court's decision today would undermine the

     availability of original content for the benefit of students and teachers.  We 

     will be considering the full judgement when it is made available, and shall 

     decide the next course of action after consultation with our legal teams," 

     [publishers] said in [a] statement.

Although this is a lawsuit in India, it is a step away from the rights of authors to own their work--a step away from the current perception of who owns the written word.  

Does an author's work belong to himself, or do educational institutions have the right to use copyrighted works without compensation to the owner?  

What is a copyright law worth in India?  

Is India just the first country to rule against authors' rights?