ECONOMIC RIGHTS OF THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER

1. Right of Reproduction: In all types of work, i.e., literary, dramatic, musical, artistic,
cinematograph film, and sound recording, the exclusive right to reproduce the work is with
the author. The Act has not defined the term ‘reproduction’. The meaning of reproduction
was explained by the court in the British Northrop case wherein it was held that there must
be a high degree of similarity to be constituted as the reproduction of another but minor
differences will not prevent one work from being a reproduction of another. The following
are the principles to know whether the defendant's acts constitute a reproduction of the
work.
A. There should be some causal connection between the plaintiffs and the defendant’s
work;
B. Whether the defendant was or was not consciously aware of such a causal connection is
not relevant
C. Where there is a substantial degree of objective similarity, this or itself will afford prima
facie evidence to show that there is a causal connection between the plaintiffs
and the defendant’s work

in the case of precis, synopses, and abridgments, the question of copyright infringement will depend
upon whether the production has involved substantial use of copyright material or only of ideas and
information. To musical works, the imp. The question to be considered is whether the alleged
infringer has made use of a substantial part of the skill and labor of the original composer. If the
appropriate music can be recognized by the ear, the addition of variations will make no difference.

If the author of a lyric or musical work has authorized the producer of a cinematograph film to record
it he cannot claim the infringement of the copyright.

Where in a case, the plaintiff was the owner of the cinematograph film titled ‘Kyun Ki Saas Bhi Kabhi
Bahu Thi’. The defendants made a commercial film under the title ‘Kyun Ki Bahu Bhi Kabhi Saas
Banegi’ with similar characters being played by the same artists. The question which came for
consideration before the court was whether the commercial film made by the defendants is a copy of
the work of the plaintiff.

2. Right of Distribution: Apart from the right to reproduce the work, the author is also vested
with the right to distribute the work. It is the right to put copies of the copyrighted work into
the commercial market i.e. it relates to the control over dissemination of actual physical
copies of the work. The copies which are already sold or in circulation are excluded from the
exclusive right to issue copies. It has been held that publication took place wherever the
publisher invited the public to acquire copies, not where the copies were received.
3. Right to Communicate Work to the Public: Another important right conferred on the author
of a work is the right to communicate his work to the public. the term communication to the
public has been defined under section 2 (FF) of the act to mean making the work available to
the public for their enjoyment, irrespective of whether they enjoy it. This it appears is
intended to cover transmission over computer networks. The Act has specifically provided
that communication through satellite and other cable means will also come within the
purview of communication to the public. This has enabled three kinds of communication,
such being public performance, being carried on in the presence of an audience,
transmission through cable network, and also wireless broadcasting. The right to
communicate the work through all these means vests exclusively with the author.
4.