INTRODUCTION
Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) encompass a range of protections guaranteed to several creators under the arena of Intellectual Property, ensuring that their works are protected and safeguarded from unauthorized usage. However, the multifaceted nature of IPR often results in overlaps, specifically in the diverse arena of applied arts. In India, the Copyright Act of 1957 (“the Copyright Act”) , and the Designs Act of 2000 (“the Designs Act”), serve as the primary legal frameworks for protecting artistic works and designs, respectively. This Blog explores the nuances of these two laws, their interplay, and the challenges that creators face when navigating these legal terrains of copyright protection and design protection.
KEY DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN COPYRIGHT AND DESIGN PROTECTIONS
The Copyright Act defines ‘artistic work’ under Section 2(c) as including paintings, sculptures, drawings, engravings, and any other work of artistic craftsmanship, irrespective of commercial intent. The Designs Act, on the other hand, under Section 2(d), limits ‘design’ to features applied to articles by Industrial processes, including shape, configuration, pattern, or ornamentation that appeals to a viewer’s eye.
While Copyright provides long-term protection (the life of Author plus 60 years posthumously), the Designs Act grants a shorter duration of protection that is, initially 10 years, extendable by another 5 years upon renewal.
LEGISLATIVE PROVISIONS GOVERNING OVERLAPS
Section 15 of The Copyright Act
This section addresses the interplay between copyright and design rights:
- Section 15(1): Copyright ceases to subsist in a design once it is registered under the Designs Act.
- Section 15(2): For designs not registered under the designs Act, copyright protection ends when the design has been applied to more than 50 articles produced by an industrial process.
Section 2(d) of the Designs Act
The section explicitly excludes “artistic works” under the Copyright Act from being registered as designs. This ensures that purely artistic creations retain copyright protection, while functional designs intended for mass production fall under the Designs Act.
JUDICIAL INTERPRETATIONS: CLARIFYING THE OVERLAP
The judiciary has itself delved into the nuances and interplay of these legislations respectively and have provided multiples stances upon the subject matter.
Microfibres Inc. Vs. Girdhar & Co., 128 (2006) DLT 238
This landmark case dealt with the “copyright infringement of artistic works used in upholstery materials.” The plaintiff claimed copyright infringement, while the defendant argued that the works qualified as designs, registrable under the Designs Act. The Delhi High Court ruled in the instant case that:
Famous artistic works, such as paintings, retain copyright protection. Designs created from such works for industrial purposes are eligible for design protection under the Designs Act. And, if registered under Designs Act, the work loses its copyright protection for industrial application. Conversely, unregistered designs lose copyright protection after 50 (fifty) reproductions by industrial processes.
This judgement therefore, harmonized the Copyright and Designs Act, emphasizing upon their distinct purposes.
Ritika Private Limited Vs. Biba Apparels Pvt. Ltd., CS(OS) No. 182/2011
In this landmark case, the plaintiff alleged copyright infringement of their artistic works applied to dresses. The court dismissed the claim, holding that the defendant’s industrial process of creating dresses did not amount to copying the plaintiff’s copyrighted work. The decision reinforced the idea that industrial applications must comply with the Designs Act.
Pranda Jewelry Pvt. Ltd Vs Aarya 24 Kt. High Court of Bombay, AIR 2015 BOM 157
In this case, the Bombay High Court emphasized that an ‘article’ is distinct from an “artistic work.” While the original artistic work continues to enjoy copyright protection, its application on an article by industrial processes, transforms it into a “design” requiring registration under the Designs Act. Ig unregistered, the copyright protection ceases after 50 reproductions of such article through industrial processes.
Holland Company LP and Ors v SP Industries, CS(COMM) 1419/2016
In this judgement by Delhi High Court, the court addresses upon engineering drawings prepared for manufacturing ATL devices. The court held that these drawings were registerable designs under the Designs Act. Since, the plaintiff had not registered the designs and had produced more than 50 devices, copyright protection ceased under Section 15(2) of the Copyright Act.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR CREATORS
Registering Designs: Creators intending to use their works for industrial purposes should register them under the Designs Act to secure legal protection. Registration ensures exclusive rights for upto 15 years.
Artistic Works: Purely artistic creations, such as paintings or sculptures, remain protected under copyright law, enjoying longer protection periods and broader rights.
Commercial Applications: Creators must be cautious when their works are adapted for industrial purposes. Once applied to articles and reproduced beyond 50 copies, unregistered designs lose protection under both Acts.
HOW THE OVERLAP AFFECTS CREATORS
The intersection of these laws can create unique challenges for creators, especially amidst balancing artistic integrity with commercial aspirations.
Loss of Exclusive Rights: A sculptor who adapts their original artwork into decorative items for industrial production might lose copyright protection after the 50th reproduction if the design is not registered. This loss can significantly impact the creator’s ability to monetize their work and maintain control over its use.
Financial Implications: Without financial protections, creators may face setbacks due to unauthorized reproductions.A textile artist, for instance, might find their unique patterns replicated by competitors without compensation, diluting their market share and reducing potential earnings. Legal battles to reclaim rights can further strain financial resources.
HOW THE OVERLAP AFFECTS CONSUMERS
The overlap between copyright and design rights does not merely affect creators; it can have a significant impact upon consumers as well. Considering a scenario, involving a famous textiles company that produces intricate patterns for sarees. These patterns are copyrighted as artistic works. If the company decides to mass-produce sarees using these patterns without registering them under the Designs Act, they risk losing copyright protection after reproducing 50 units of those sarees.
Now, if a rival brand starts replicating these patterns post the 50-unit threshold, the original creator might lack legal recourse. This situation could lead to:
Consumer Confusion: Consumers might struggle to differentiate between original and copied designs, impacting brand loyalty.
Quality Concerns: Replicas might not meet the quality standards of the original, leading to dissatisfaction among consumers.
Increased Costs: Consumers may face higher prices if creators raise costs to recover losses incurred from unprotected designs.
GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE
In jurisdictions like the United States and the European Union, similar overlaps exist between copyright and design protections. However, these systems often provide clearer pathways for dual protection, allowing creators to secure both copyright and design rights in certain cases. India’s stringent bifurcation underscores the importance of strategic registration choices by creators.
CONCLUSION
The interplay between the Copyright Act and the Designs Act reflects the Indian legislature’s intent to balance the interests of artistic creators and industrial designers. While copyright prioritizes long-term protection for purely artistic works, the Designs Act focuses on functional designs used in commerce. Creators must understand these distinctions and judiciously register their works to safeguard their rights effectively. Judicial interpretations continue to play a pivotal role in shaping this evolving legal landscape, ensuring that both laws function harmoniously without undermining each other.
Author: Sanya Pandey, 4th Year law student at Symbiosis Law School, Nagpur
Link to Ipindia’ website: https://www.ipindia.gov.in
Wish to read similar articles? Click on the link to read more: https://jpassociates.co.in/role-of-ipr-startup-growth/
