The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford & Ors. v. Rameshwari Photocopy Services & Ors.

Relevant Acts and provisions

Copyright Act, 1957

Section 52(1)(i)

Provisions considered: Section 52(1)(i) of the Copyright Act, 1957, exempting reproduction of works in the course of instruction.

Brief facts

Academic publishers sued a photocopy shop operating on a university campus, and the university itself, alleging that compiling and selling course packs of photocopied extracts from the publishers' textbooks for prescribed courses infringed their copyright. The Single Judge dismissed the application for an interim injunction, holding that the course packs fell within the Section 52(1)(i) exception for reproduction in the course of instruction. The publishers appealed to the Division Bench.

Issues before the Court

1. Does the Section 52(1)(i) exception for reproduction in the course of instruction extend to compiled course packs prepared by a third-party photocopier?
2. Is the exception subject to a strict quantitative limit on reproduction?
3. Could the extent and necessity of reproduction be decided at the interim stage?

Court's findings

The Court held that Section 52(1)(i) is not merely a fair dealing exception subject to strict quantitative limits, but a broader exception rooted in the value of access to education, permitting reproduction of works in the course of instruction so long as it serves the purpose of instruction and is not a substitute for the class purchasing the licensed work.

The Court observed that whether the extent of copying in a given course pack was reasonably necessary for education as prescribed by the syllabus, or exceeded what instruction required, was a mixed question of fact and degree that could not be conclusively resolved at the interim stage and required evidence at trial.

The Court declined to restore any interim injunction, directed the suits to proceed to trial, and required the university to maintain and periodically furnish records of course packs prepared and their correlation to prescribed syllabi.

Decision

Division Bench declined to grant an interim injunction, upheld the availability of the Section 52(1)(i) exception in principle, and remitted the extent-of-copying question to trial.

Keywords

Access To Education Copyright Infringement Educational Exception Fair Dealing Literary Work