Author Name: Prathigadapa Sai Manvitha 3rd year BBA LLB CHRIST (Deemed to be University)

Copyright laws are significant in safeguarding intellectual property rights because they ensure that the original works of authors, artists, and creators have rights over them. Despite India and the UK being part of the international framework of the Berne Convention and the TRIPS Agreement, their copyright systems are distinct regarding protection periods, strategies for enforcement, and scope. This discussion explores the legal structures, range of protections, enforcement practices, and recent advancements in the copyright laws of these two nations, thus giving a comparative view under distinct subheadings.

Legislative Framework

The copyright legislation in India is housed under the Copyright Act 1957. The laws of Britain substantially shaped it at that time when India was still under colonial rule and, through the years, significantly evolved with the country’s changes in legal, economic, and technological scenarios. The Act provides a legal foundation for protecting literary, artistic, dramatic, and musical works, cinematograph films, sound recordings, and software programs. The act has been amended numerous times during the decades to keep it in tune with the relevant issues today. It was last amended in 2012 to make Indian copyright law at par with the international standard for issues concerning digital rights management, equitable royalty distribution, and anti-piracy measures.

The most important provisions were brought through amendments in 2012, including recognizing performers’ rights, protection against circumvention of TPMs, and equitable remuneration, especially in music and movies. The Copyright Rules, 2013 laid down clear registration, licensing, and dispute resolution procedures. When the Act and Rules go together, they form an integrated legal framework that tries to balance in favor of creators on the one hand and both distributors and the public at large on the other.

On the other hand, copyright in the United Kingdom is governed by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988 (CDPA). The CDPA is a significant consolidation of previous laws. It embodies principles from several international treaties and EU directives, reflecting the UK’s long history of harmonization of copyright laws across Europe. While predating the digital revolution, the CDPA has been amended to date to respond to the emerging challenges in online piracy, digital rights management, and creators’ rights in the digital economy.

Another major strength of the UK’s copyright system is that it has adopted EU directives such as the Information Society Directive and the Copyright Directive, which have shaped its approach to digital content, database rights, and performers’ protections. As a post-Brexit world, the UK retains those same standards to preserve its standing across the globe and to safeguard compatibility with other jurisdictions whose laws are compatible with Britain. Brexit has, however, allowed for potential departures from European law that may eventually be more tailor-made domestic reforms at later stages.

Historical linkages between the copyright laws of India and the UK are apparent, given the shared legal heritage. Whereas the legal structure of India reflects socio-economic priorities with access and protection, the laws of the UK are much more apt for fitting into the mainstream global contemporary trend regarding digital challenges. In that respect, the UK is best placed as a global leader in copyright protection, mainly due to more developed infrastructures for enforcing agencies and because of pro-active collaboration between industries.

In their respective legislative frameworks, both countries have shown commitment to protecting intellectual property rights and facing the specific issues presented by the socio-economic and technological environments within which they work. They must open their copyright law systems to further reform concerning evolving problems like artificial intelligence, cross-border enforcement, and global piracy issues.

Scope of Protected Works

Although India and the UK each have protection on similar categories of works under their respective copyright frameworks, both countries differ fundamentally in the specificity and emphasis of several types of creative content.

In the case of India, this scope would be defined as that mentioned under the Copyright Act 1957 by ensuring complete protection for several intellectual or artistic expressions in the country. The Act is also related to the protection of various literary, dramatic, and musical works. Artistic works comprise painting, drawing, and sculpture. Equally, there is protection afforded to films, sound recordings, and even computer programs. Again, the provisions of the Act would match the advances in technology in creative arts. Thus, creative works in many modes are protected, promoting creation and cultural expression. Its very wide scope is to strike the proper balance between the rights of creators and those of users, limiting not too much access to creative works but keeping incentives to create.

One of the distinctive characteristics of India’s copyright regime has been the protection accorded to software and computer programs as literary works under Section 2(o) of the Act. The provision thus recognizes the role of software in modern-day innovation and brings Indian law in consonance with the international norm, including the TRIPS Agreement. Cinematograph films and sound recordings are protected under the Act as separate categories, given their distinct commercial and cultural values.

The UK Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) provides comparable protection but places far greater value on specific works. For example, UK copyright law places much, far greater emphasis on databases – partly due to the Directive of the European Union over databases. This directive gives copyright protection to a database that shows originality in the selection or arrangement of data and an extra sui generis right for those databases that involve significant investment to create them. This means it protects intellectual and financial efforts in making the database under copyright and sui generis law.

The UK specifically also protects broadcasts and performances. It, therefore, underlines an integrated approach it has undertaken to protect creative output in any way. It guards the broadcasting against unauthorized reproduction and distribution. Performer’s rights are also assured. In this case, artists can control the recording and use of their performances. They thus supplement their economic and moral rights.

Although Indian law recognizes the rights of performers, it appears that relatively less attention is focused on broadcasts and databases: differences in cultural and economic priorities between the two jurisdictions speak to that. Thorough protection for all formats of creative output, whether reliant on technology or innovation as drivers of creativity, is of greater importance to the UK.

Both jurisdictions try to balance creativity and access to cultural and educational resources for the public. More detailed in scope, however, is the degree of incorporation of databases into the UK, and such a system stresses broadcasts and performances to the satisfaction of any technologically advanced society. The more excellent social aim of India and its equality policy will shape this scope of protection, showing how copyright law can assimilate the specific goals of each country.

Like technology and creative industries, this trend for both countries will change the definition of protected works in India and the UK. One of the ways each could expand or narrow its definition of protected works to accommodate new forms of expression might include AI-generated content, or virtual reality works. The heart of this dynamic adaptability must make copyright law relevant and practical.

Length of Copyright Protection

There are stark differences between the two jurisdictions concerning the duration of copyright protection.

The duration for protection in India was established in literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works by granting them copyright for 60 years following the author’s death. Films that use cinematographs, sound recordings, and photographs would receive a 60-year copyright following their first publication date. These are relatively few protections because India consistently acknowledges its need to balance private rights with public access.

In contrast, the UK offers more extended protection; most works are protected during the lifetime of the copyright plus 70 years from the author’s death date. Films are protected throughout the lifetime of the last major contributor to live at any time, including that of the director and composer; again, the longer-term period corresponds with EU practice and gives more incredible commercial benefits for copyright owners in the UK.

Moral Rights

Moral rights protect the personal relationship of creators with their works and, therefore, respect authorship and integrity.

India’s Copyright Act 1957 solidly protects moral rights under Section 57, giving rights to the creators to obtain attribution (paternity) and protection against distortion or mutilation of their work. Interestingly, moral rights in India cannot be waived or assigned and are, therefore, inviolable.

The recognition of moral rights in the UK is given under CDPA and can be waived by agreement. Hence, the term is agreed upon and may defeat the personal rights connected with the creators.

Fair use vs. fair dealing

Both jurisdictions recognize the balance between copyright protection and public interest. They differ in how this would be done.

India accords to the doctrine of fair dealing. Under that, there is permissible use within certain limits of copyright subject matter, such as criticisms, reviews, reporting, research, and teaching. While parody and satire, under those circumstances, are not made explicit and therefore raise legal questions in those contexts.

UK: While the concept is narrower, it explicitly includes parody, caricature, and pastiche, which marks a relatively progressive approach to expression. Moreover, permitted use includes studying for private or non-commercial purposes, conducting research, and reporting current events that will balance the interests of creators and users’ needs.

Digital Rights and Technological Measures

The digital era has faced formidable challenges enforcing copyrights, forcing both jurisdictions to reform.

India made strides in this regard 2012 when it introduced provisions of digital rights management in the amendments: prohibitions against circumventing TPMs and providing safeguards against online, unauthorized uses. The difficulty remains at the level of enforcement, which includes the resource constraints and the technological limitations thereof.

The UK has developed its digital copyright structure and integrates all European directives into the framework, even the Information Society Directive. As a result, the UK puts up decisive actions to prevent digital piracy by institutions like the Intellectual Property Office in cooperation with various industries. All these are meant to protect the full copyrights of digital works.

Performers’ Rights

Performers’ rights are part of copyright law aimed at the intellectual and economic interests of artists, musicians, actors, and other performers regarding their actual work. Ultimately, they ensure that performers have control over the use and dissemination of their performances – whether live or recorded – and protect their contributions from unauthorized exploitation.

The performers’ rights were introduced formally in India by amendments in the Copyright Act of 1957, enacted in 2012. The performer got absolute rights to reproduce, distribute, and broadcast his performances for 50 years from the performance date. This was a landmark within Indian copyright law since it gave performers legal tools to claim royalties and enforce rights in cases of infringement, among their exclusive rights granted, which would include live performances, audio and video recordings, and digital platforms, in keeping pace with the growing importance of online media in disseminating creative works.

The country has also been of utmost importance regarding the rights of performers in industries that constitute music, film, and theatre productions since these performances are most often the primary foundation upon which commercial success is built. For instance, playback singers in the Indian music industry can now demand royalties over the use of their recorded performances, helping to rectify historical imbalances in revenue sharing. The 2012 amendments also vest rights in performers to enter into contracts stipulating usage terms for their performances; they, therefore, have control over intellectual property.

UK law on the performer’s rights is much broader and comes under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988 (CDPA). The performance rights in the UK last 70 years from the performance date. This longer term is consistent with the general protection granted by the UK copyright system and with best practices outlined in EU directives. The longer term ensures that artists have extended economic benefits, meaning that they and their heirs can benefit financially from their creative contributions for a more extended period.

The UK framework for the rights of performers is more than just duration; it presents a comprehensive set of protections. Performers have exclusive rights to authorize or prohibit the recording, broadcasting, or communication of their live performances to the public. Once a performance is fixed in a tangible medium, including a recording, performers keep rights over its reproduction, distribution, and rental. These protections extend into the digital space to ensure the right of performers to maintain control over the use of their work in streaming services, online broadcasts, and other modern distributions.

Moreover, the UK places greater importance on the performer’s moral rights. This further grants the performer the right to be identified as his performance’s author and object to any distortion or mutilation that may damage his reputation. All these rights are created for the protection of the personal and professional dignity of the performers and the respect and value of their creative contribution.

The difference in the periods and coverage of performers’ rights between India and the UK reflects different socio-economic contexts and priorities. Where India is balancing rights between performers with the accessibility needs of such a vast, diverse population, the UK system seems more geared toward robust protections of creators in a very commercially oriented and technologically advanced environment.

With the increasing number of digital platforms commanding the dissemination of creative works, the rights of performers in the two jurisdictions must continue growing. Issues like copying by artificial intelligence, streaming by unauthorized persons, and international piracy will continue demanding ongoing reform to ensure that persons in question control their intellectual property in this increasingly digital and interconnected world. The performers’ rights need to be protected on economic and moral grounds, and India and the UK need to work towards addressing the same issues.

Enforcing Mechanism

The success of copyright rests on effective enforcement, and both countries use civil and criminal remedies to enforce copyright.

Civil remedies: Injunction, damages, accounts of profits. Criminal remedies like imprisonment and fines are taken into consideration for piracy. Even if the provisions are available, the enforcement goes to the background as the judicial process is slow and public awareness of copyright laws does not exist.

The UK has a better regime of enforcement, facilitated by proactive initiatives, such as Creative Content UK and specialized agencies. Civil remedies are matched with interim relief measures and more stringent law enforcement of criminal penalties, ensuring more robust deterrence against copyright violations.

Recent Developments

Both have shown spectacular advancement in their copyright laws against emerging issues.

India: Equity Royalties to authors/composers have been highlighted since the 2012 amendment; it is a significant concern for the music and cinema industry. Proposed reforms attempt to address the issues that range from AI-generated works to text and data mining to international digital piracy.

The UK also updated copyright laws, especially in the post-Brexit context. The UK retains EU-derived standards but continues to push for reforms to correct issues arising from emerging technologies and artificial intelligence. This scenario reflects the evolving nature of copyright law in both jurisdictions.

Conclusion

There is commonality in some foundational principles between India and the UK because of joint international commitments, but their approaches have been quite different. UK copyright regimes are characterized by longer durations of protection, more advanced digital rights, and more vigorous enforcement mechanisms, and they provide a comprehensive framework to creators and businesses. Indian laws are framed to balance the protection of creators and public access, which comes from its socio-economic background.

These developments will test the copyright frameworks of both jurisdictions to evolve and respond to issues such as AI-generated works and digital piracy. Creators, businesses, and legal practitioners operating or navigating between these jurisdictions must understand these differences. And the way to this unlock can be found in how complex the copyright law should stimulate creativity and innovation.

Footnotes: 

1. Mayank Negi, A Comparative Study of Copyright Laws in India, US, UK, IJSR 270-272 (2018). 

2. European Innovation Council and SMEs Executive Agency, Comparative India-Europea: Protection of original creations, Publications Office of the European Union (2022). 

3. Eunice Erhagbe, A Comparative Analysis of Copyright laws: Nigerian Copyright Act compared with the United States, India, and the United Kingdom, with a focus on the film industry, 1 Fountain University Law Journal (2024). 

4. Lisa P. Lukose & Shilpika Pandey, Protection of Celebrity Rights- A comparative analysis of relevant IPR laws in US, UK, and India, 14 Journal of Intellectual Property 89-122 (2019).