Record Details

Theoretical Underpinnings of Copyright and Design Laws Post-Krishika Lulla and Godrej Sara Lee: Decisions of the Supreme Court of India

NOPR - NISCAIR Online Periodicals Repository

View Archive Info
 
 
Field Value
 
Title Theoretical Underpinnings of Copyright and Design Laws Post-Krishika Lulla and Godrej Sara Lee: Decisions of the Supreme Court of India
 
Creator Raza, Aqa
Alam, Ghayur
 
Subject Labour Theory
Utilitarian Theory
Natural Right Theory
The Copyright Act, 1957
The Copyright Rules 1958
The Copyright Rules 2013
The Designs Act, 2000
Per Incuriam
Theoretical Underpinnings
The Constitution of India
Article 145(3)
Supreme Court of India
Presumption of Constitutionality
Social Planning Theory
Ratiocination
Intellectual Property
Publici Juris
Draftsmanship
Craftsmanship
Amendment
Exclusive Right
Negative Right
 
Description 434-441
This Paper seeks to build upon the method and findings of ‘Theoretical Underpinnings of Copyright and Design Laws:
Decisions of the Supreme Court of India’1 with a view to examine the theoretical underpinnings of copyright law post
Krishika Lulla2 and design law post Godrej Sara Lee3 as discovered or constructed in the decisions of the Supreme Court of
India (Supreme Court). An analysis of the reported decisions on copyright law reveals that: (i) validity of The Copyright
Actor of any provisions of the Act was not in question in any of the decisions; (ii) constitutional validity of Rule 29 (4) of
The Copyright Rules, 2013 was in question in one of the decisions in which the Supreme Court showing deference to the
legislative wisdom reversed the decision of the High Court on the ground that the High Court has overreached its remit and
has re-drafted the rule; (iii) both Labour and Utilitarian Theories, and not any other theory, have been simultaneously
invoked by the Supreme Court; and (iv) on an average, the Court has decided 1.66 copyright cases in a year; or one
copyright case in 251 days, or in .68 (point six eight) years. It appears that the Supreme Court was invoking both Labour and
Utilitarian Theories mechanically without going into the clear differences between the two. It has been previously4argued
that the Court should have applied judicially manageable standards to rigorously scrutinize the theoretical underpinnings of
copyright law from all possible angles. This Paper reiterates this argument for nothing seems to have changed in the judicial
approach when it comes to theoretical underpinnings of copyright law. An analysis of decisions on design law reveals that:
(i) only one decision has been reported on design law and the Court has not gone into the question of theoretical
underpinnings; (ii) in four decisions there is only a reference to The Designs Act but these decisions have not decided
any question of design law; and (iii) on an average, the Court has decided .08 (point zero eight) design cases in a year; or
one design case in 4,595 days, or in12.58 years.
 
Date 2023-01-25T06:35:08Z
2023-01-25T06:35:08Z
2023-01
 
Type Article
 
Identifier 0975-1076 (Online); 0971-7544 (Print)
http://nopr.niscpr.res.in/handle/123456789/61246
https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v27i6.66025
 
Language en
 
Publisher NIScPR-CSIR, India
 
Source JIPR Vol.27(6) [November 2022]