Legal To Photocopy Textbooks - Delhi Court Rules

I remember my queue to such north campus shops during graduation time ! From a student point of view and for a student like me I was never satisfied with one book , I do not know from where I got this habit but right from std.X I had this habit of referring as many book as possible , I did buy good number of books from my seniors and second hand from bookshops...they were still costly 400-500 rs in 2010! So even if i get money from parent I don't think I would have bought all the books. And the Xerox wale "bhayya" knew more imp pages than us !! ( sometimes) . That time i would have fainted if Xerox shop was shut down.

Now 6 years later I think I understand from concern here but the bookworm inside me says no way !!

 

@Rihana : Disclaimer - I have not studied in Delhi. I have done my graduation and post graduation from a central university. The way the syllabus was structured, we had to somehow refer a number of books, usually one for each unit. And in total if I remember the total number of books I read would be a dozen per subject. Many of the books being eastern economy editions, much cheaper than the US editions. But the eees also cost a couple of grands. Considering 3 subjects it would be expensive and not rational also as we had to study only a fraction of the books. I am not defending what I did. I made some notes and had some stuff photocopied from the books in the library.
Yes. Never thought of the other side.

 

"Taking notes in library - as was done in pre-photocopier days is time consuming. photo copying is easier compared to taking notes." This is one of the reason sited. If copyrights are not protected, I wonder why will anyone want to write books for educational purposes. If no one is going to buy book and just take photocopies, then author does not profit, only the photocopiers make money.
Now this judgement will lead to costlier books not getting published/sold in India. In turn this will lead to new books written by new authors and publishers who will have to keep the cost closer to what it will cost to photocopy.

 

yes, as long as it is for educational purpose. All we got to do is enroll into a 'film appreciation' course and enjoy 'pirated' dvds!!!

 

I think this is yet another case of the law not having caught up with technology.

Copyright laws were originally aimed at publishers, not consumers. They were designed to prevent publishers from copying and publishing each others' intellectual property. Back then, publishers alone had the ability to copy books on a large enough scale to dent another publisher's income. Today, anyone can copy and distribute texts.

Students make notes in college libraries and share those notes. Students also sell their secondhand books depriving the publisher of income. This has been considered acceptable for a long time.

The problem here is that the photocopy service is publishing texts without permission and making a profit doing so. If this were a free service or if the students were using a copier themselves, it might not have gone to court.

I'm not familiar with Section 52 of the Copyright Act, and I don't know if it defines "education." The wording may exclude outright abuse like the "film appreciation course."

Since the primary purpose of a textbook is education, does this mean no textbook has copyright protection?

Sure, copyright is not a divine right. Neither is land ownership – but I’m sure the Delhi court would not take kindly to someone trespassing on its property, say, by setting up home in its main lobby.

How the court determined this, we don’t know. Of all the students that benefited from the copying service, surely there must have been one or two that could afford to buy the book? This ruling denies the publisher any slight additional profit it might have made.

tldr version: IMHO, this ruling is terrible. The law needs to catch up with technology.

.

 

No aping the West.

Stealing from the West, OTOH, is fine.



.