DU photocopy case: International publishers challenge Delhi HC verdict
Some international publishers have approached the Delhi High Court, challenging a single judge verdict last month allowing the sale of photocopied pages of their books in Delhi University for use by students.delhi Updated: Oct 06, 2016 20:29 IST
Some international publishers have approached the Delhi High Court, challenging a single judge verdict last month allowing the sale of photocopied pages of their books in Delhi University for use by students.
Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press (UK), Cambridge University Press India Pvt Ltd, Taylor and Francis Group (UK) and Taylor and Francis Books India Pvt Ltd has moved the division bench of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Pratibha Rani.
The publishers said a stay on the single bench verdict was needed as it had led not only one photocopy shop, but hundreds of them, to sell photocopies.
“We have kept the matter for final disposal on November 29…We shall hear you and pass the order. So as of now, no interim order,” the bench said.
The September 16 verdict was considered a landmark decision that was likely to lend relief to thousands of students from buying all books prescribed as suggested reading for their courses.
The publishers contended that “through this appeal, we seek assurance that copyright law in India will balance the interests of those creating learning materials here in India as well as globally, with those requiring access to them in a fair and sustainable manner”.
The single judge verdict had lifted a ban on a photocopier kiosk inside Delhi University from issuing copies of chapters from textbooks of the international publishers. The court had said the copyright in literary works did not confer “absolute ownership” to the authors.
The international publishing giants had alleged that the kiosk was violating their copyright and “at the instance of Delhi University” was causing huge financial losses as students stopped buying their text books.
But the court had remarked that, “The students can never be expected to buy all the books, different portions whereof are prescribed as suggested reading and can never be said to be the potential customers of the plaintiffs”.