Moral Rights of Author

8/7/2016
MoralRightsOfAuthorAcademike
ACADEMIKE
Lawctopus' Law Journal + Knowledge Center (ISSN: 2349-9796)
ABOUT
SUBMISSIONS
ISSUES
ADVISORS
STUDENT EDITORS
CONTACT
Moral Rights Of Author

April6,2015byadmin LeaveaComment
NidhiKumari,CNLU
INTRODUCTION
UniversalDeclarationofHumanRights,Article27(2)
Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from
anyscientific,literaryorartisticproductionofwhichheistheauthor[i]
When an artist creates, he expresses an opinion. Whether it is in the form of a painting, a
photograph,amotionpictureorinanywrittenform,thatopinionisoftheartist,bytheartist,
and must be protected. In this, who and what entity financed or provided the means for its
productionshouldhavenobearingandnorelevancetothedeterminationofownershipinthe
opinion produced.Moral rights are representative of social values concerning authorship,
creativityandartisticwork.Theyarebasedonabeliefthatartisticcreationissomethingmore
thananattempttoearnalivelihood.
Moral rights flow from the fact that a literary or artistic work reflects the personality of the
creator,justasmuchastheeconomicrightsreflecttheauthorsneedtokeepbodyandsoul
together. The creativity impulse and the work are of value to society, through his work, the
artist provides an important service to society. By recognizing these aspects of artistic life,
moralrightsbringaculturefocustocopyrightlaw.
http://www.lawctopus.com/academike/moralrightsauthor/
1/20
8/7/2016
MoralrightsordroitmoraloriginatedinFrenchlaw.TheRomeActof1928addedthedroit
moraltotheBernconventionof1886.
Article6bis(1)oftheBerneConventionprovides:
Independentlyoftheauthorseconomicrights,andevenafterthetransferofsaidrights,the
author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion,
mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work,
whichwouldbeprejudicialtohishonourorreputation.[ii]
CONCEPTOFMORALRIGHT
CopyrightisaformofintellectualpropertyprotectiongrantedunderIndianlawtothecreators
of original works of authorship such as literary works (including computer programs, tables
and compilations including computer databases which may be expressed in words, codes,
schemesorinanyotherform,includingamachinereadablemedium),dramatic,musicaland
artisticworks,cinematographicfilmsandsoundrecordings.
Copyrightlawprotectsexpressionsofideasratherthantheideasthemselves.Undersection
13 of the Copyright Act 1957, copyright protection is conferred on literary works, dramatic
works,musicalworks,artisticworks,cinematographfilmsandsoundrecording.Forexample,
books,computerprogramsareprotectedundertheActasliteraryworks.
Copyrightreferstoabundleofexclusiverightsvestedintheownerofcopyrightbyvirtueof
Section14oftheAct.Theserightscanbeexercisedonlybytheownerofcopyrightorbyany
other person who is duly licensed in this regard by the owner of copyright. These rights
include the right of adaptation, right of reproduction, right of publication, right to make
translations,communicationtopublicetc.
Copyright protection is conferred on all Original literary, artistic, musical or dramatic,
cinematograph and sound recording works. Original means, that the work has not been
copied from any other source. Copyright protection commences the moment a work is
created,anditsregistrationisoptional.Howeveritisalwaysadvisabletoobtainaregistration
forabetterprotection.Copyrightregistrationdoesnotconferanyrightsandismerelyaprima
facie proof of an entry in respect of the work in the Copyright Register maintained by the
RegistrarofCopyrights.
AsperSection17oftheAct,theauthororcreatoroftheworkisthefirstownerofcopyright.
An exception to this rule is that, the employer becomes the owner of copyright in
circumstances where the employee creates a work in the course of and scope of
employment.[iii]
2/20
8/7/2016
Copyrightregistrationisinvaluabletoacopyrightholderwhowishestotakeacivilorcriminal
actionagainsttheinfringer.Registrationformalitiesaresimpleandthepaperworkisleast.In
case,theworkhasbeencreatedbyapersonotherthanemployee,itwouldbenecessaryto
filewiththeapplication,acopyoftheassignmentdeed.
Indianperspectiveoncopyrightprotection:
TheCopyrightAct,1957providescopyrightprotectioninIndia.Itconferscopyrightprotection
inthefollowingtwoforms:
(A)Economicrightsoftheauthor,and
(B)MoralRightsoftheauthor.
(A)EconomicRights:Thecopyrightsubsistsinoriginalliterary,dramatic,musicalandartistic
workscinematographsfilmsandsoundrecordings.Theauthorsofcopyrightintheaforesaid
worksenjoyeconomicrightsu/s14oftheAct.[iv]Therightsaremainly,inrespectofliterary,
dramaticandmusical,otherthancomputerprogram,toreproducetheworkinanymaterial
form including the storing of it in any medium by electronic means, to issue copies of the
worktothepublic,toperformtheworkinpublicorcommunicatingittothepublic,tomake
any cinematograph film or sound recording in respect of the work, and to make any
translationoradaptationofthework.Inthecaseofcomputerprogram,theauthorenjoysin
additiontotheaforesaidrights,therighttosellorgiveonhire,orofferforsaleorhireany
copyofthecomputerprogramregardlesswhethersuchcopyhasbeensoldorgivenonhire
onearlieroccasions.Inthecaseofanartisticwork,therightsavailabletoanauthorinclude
therighttoreproducetheworkinanymaterialform,includingdepictioninthreedimensions
ofatwodimensionalworkorintwodimensionsofathreedimensionalwork,tocommunicate
or issues copies of the work to the public, to include the work in any cinematograph work,
andtomakeanyadaptationofthework.Inthecaseofcinematographfilm,theauthorenjoys
therighttomakeacopyofthefilmincludingaphotographofanyimageformingpartthereof,
tosellorgiveonhireorofferforsaleorhire,anycopyofthefilm,andtocommunicatethe
filmtothepublic.Theserightsaresimilarlyavailabletotheauthorofsoundrecording.
In addition to the aforesaid rights, the author of a painting, sculpture, drawing or of a
manuscriptofaliterary,dramaticormusicalwork,ifhewasthefirstownerofthecopyright,
shallbeentitledtohavearighttoshareintheresalepriceofsuchoriginalcopyprovidedthat
theresalepriceexceedsrupeestenthousand.
(B) Moral Rights: Section 57 of the Act defines the two basic moral rights of an author.
Theseare:
3/20
8/7/2016
(i)Rightofpaternity,and
(ii)Rightofintegrity.
Therightofpaternityreferstoarightofanauthortoclaimauthorshipofworkandarightto
prevent all others from claiming authorship of his work. Right of integrity empowers the
authortopreventdistortion,mutilationorotheralterationsofhiswork,oranyotheractionin
relationtosaidwork,whichwouldbeprejudicialtohishonourorreputation.Theprovisoto
section57(1)providesthattheauthorshallnothaveanyrighttorestrainorclaimdamagesin
respect of any adaptation of a computer program to which section 52 (1)(aa) applies (i.e.
reverseengineeringofthesame).Itmustbenotedthatfailuretodisplayaworkortodisplay
it to the satisfaction of the author shall not be deemed to be an infringement of the rights
conferred by this section. The legal representatives of the author may exercise the rights
conferreduponanauthorofaworkbysection57(1),otherthantherighttoclaimauthorship
ofthework.[v]
Moralrightsarerightsthatthecreatorofaworkisautomaticallyentitledtoandwhichnoone
elsecanclaim.Themoralrightsofaworkcanevenremainwiththecreatoraftertheirdeath.
Moralrightsexistalongsidecopyrightincertaintypesofwork.Generally,moralrightsremain
with the author of a work or pass to the authors estate on death. Unlike copyright, moral
rightscannotbeassigned(legallytransferred).However,theyarefrequentlywaived.
The existence of moral rights raises an important additional element in the negotiation and
drafting of certain agreements. Unfortunately, for many authors the transfer/licence of
copyright is often accompanied by the insistence of the purchaser on the waiver of those
moralrights.
Relating to duty or obligation pertaining to those intentions and actions of which right and
wrong,virtueandvice,arepredicated,ortotherulesbywhichsuchintentionsandactions
oughttobedirectedrelatingtothepractice,manners,orconductofmenassocialbeingsin
relation to each other, as respects right and wrong, so far as they are properly subject to
rules.
Thedefinitionofmoralrightsisgivenundermanylaws.Moralrightsaretheembodimentof
thenaturalrightsofanartisthasoverwhathehascreated.Moralrightsarepersonallegal
rightsbelongingtothecreatorofcopyrightworksandnotbetransferred,assignedorsold.
Moral in other wordsMoral rights are the rights individual creators have in relation to
copyright works or films they have created. Moral rights are separate from the economic
rightsofthecopyrightowner,suchastherightstoreproducetheworkorcommunicateitto
4/20
8/7/2016
thepublic.[vi]
Moralrightsapplyto:
Literaryworkssuchasmostwrittenmaterialandincludingcomputerprograms
Artistic works such as photographs, sketches, plans, maps, paintings, three dimensional
worksfrompotterytostatuaryandbuildings,craftworkandmurals
Musicalworks
Dramaticworkssuchasplaysandscreenplays
Cinematographfilmsbothfeaturefilmsanddocumentaries,aswellastelevisionprograms,
commercials,andmusicvideos.
Moralrightslastforthesameperiodascopyrightprotection.Generallythatisforthelifetime
oftheauthorplus70years.Forfilms,copyrightlastsfor70yearsafterfirstpublicationbut
therightofintegrityexpiresonthedeathoftheauthors.
Theauthorofafilmisdeemedtobethedirector,thescreenwriter,andtheproducer.Ifthe
producerisacompanyandthereisnoindividualproducer,theproducerhasnomoralrights.
[vii]
InfringementofMoralRights:
Rights, or authorizes another to so such type of mistreats. The Courts have discretion it
choose remedies for that infringement and also can prescribe damages, ordering public
apologyandreversalofamistreatmentofawork,filmorperformance.
In Australian copyright, if a creator makes a claim for infringement of moral rights, the
remediesaCourtcangrantinclude
Financialcompensation(damages)
Anordertopreventorstopaparticularactivity(aninjunction),
An order that any false attribution of authorship, or derogatory treatment of the work, be
reversedorremoved.Inthirdwaythereareanumberoffactorswhichthecourtcantakeinto
considerationatthetimeofdecidingtheappropriateremedy,suchasanythingdonebythe
defendanttoreducetheeffectsofinfringement.Ifcontemplatingthegrantingofaninjunction,
5/20
8/7/2016
aCourtmustfirstlookatwaystogivethepartiesanopportunitytonegotiateasettlement.
[viii]
Visual Artiste Rights (VARA) grants two rights to authors of visual works. The right of
attribution and the right of integrity. The right of attribution provides author for preventing
misattribution of a work, and to require that the authorship of the work not be disclosed.
Author can take an action for defamation if the authors help of a work is attributed to an
authoragainsthis/herwill,ormisattributed.[ix]
AmarnathSehgalvs.UnionofIndian&others[x]thecourtprovidedremedyforinfringementof
his special rights or moral rights.It was held by the court in this case that copy right is a
bundle of rights, which the author can exploit, independently for economic benefit any
exercisingtheserights.Acopyrightownermayexploithisworkhimselforlicenseothersto
exploitanyoneormoreoftherightsforaconsideration,whichmaybeintheformofroyalty
or a lump sum. Payment copyright apart, the author of a work has certain moral rights as
well.
KINDSOFMORALRIGHT
TheRightofAttribution(Paternity)
The right of attribution, also referred to as the right of paternity, is the right of authors to
claim authorship of their works. It aims to determine whether and how the authors name
shallbeaffixedtothework.Itestablishesthreeseparatebutrelatedprotections.First,thatit
isanauthorsrighttobemadeknowntothepublicasthecreatorofthework.Iftheauthor
so desires, his or her name must appear on all copies as well as advertising and other
publicityforthework.Second,thatanauthorcanpreventothersfromusurpinghis[orher]
workbynaminganotherpersonastheauthor.Thisallowstheauthortopreventplagiarism
ofthework.Finally,anauthorcanpreventothersfromwrongfullyattributingtohim[orher]a
workhe[orshe]hasnotwritten.Thisprotectstheauthorfromfalseattributionofauthorship
andfrombeingnamedastheauthorofaworkthathasbeenmutilated.[xi]
In addition, the right also gives the author the right to not claim authorship of the work.
Authors may elect to remain anonymous or use pseudonyms instead of their real
names.However,therightdoesnotnecessarilyentitlesuchauthorstopreventathirdparty
fromdisclosingtheauthorsrealname.
Therightofpaternityreferstoarightofanauthortoclaimauthorshipofworkandarightto
prevent all others from claiming authorship of his work. Right of integrity empowers the
authortopreventdistortion,mutilationorotheralterationsofhiswork,oranyotheractionin
relationtosaidwork,whichwouldbeprejudicialtohishonourorreputation.Theprovisoto
6/20
8/7/2016
section57(1)providesthattheauthorshallnothaveanyrighttorestrainorclaimdamagesin
respect of any adaptation of a computer program to which section 52 (1)(aa) applies (i.e.
reverseengineeringofthesame).Itmustbenotedthatfailuretodisplayaworkortodisplay
it to the satisfaction of the author shall not be deemed to be an infringement of the rights
conferredbythissection.[xii]
Thelegalrepresentativesoftheauthormayexercisetherightsconferreduponanauthorofa
workbysection57(1),otherthantherighttoclaimauthorshipofthework.[xiii]
TheDefinitionofRighttoIntegrity
Therightofintegrityhasbeencalledthemostimportantmoralright.Thenotionoftheright
to integrity is that since the work of art is an expression of the artists personality so
distortion, dismemberment or misrepresentation of the work mistreats an expression of the
artists personality, affects his artistic identity, personality and honor, and thus impairs a
legallyprotectedpersonalityinterest.
The right provides authors with a right to prohibit modifications of their works without their
consent regardless of whether the modification would negatively impact or objectively
improve the work. In both France and Germany, the modification does not have to be
detrimental to the authors honor or reputation to qualify as a violation of the right. Both
countries,however,havecarveoutsthatprovideexceptionstothisbroadrulethatapplyin
thecontextofmodernworks.
Therightissaidtoprovidetheartistwithgeneralprotectionagainstanyandallsubstantive
modifications. Once a work has been sold or made public, this right allows the creator to
insiststhattheworksstructuralintegritymustnotbeviolatedbymeasureswhichcouldalter
ordistortit.
Aspartofthisright,theauthorisdeemedtobeentitledtomakechangesintheworkorto
authorizeotherstodoso.Insomecountries,therightincludestheabilitypreventthetotal
destruction of the work. Notably, however, the U.S. does not recognize such protections,
outsideofthelimitedrealmofworksprotectedasvisualart.
Theauthorofacopyright,literary,dramatic,musicalorartisticworkandthedirectorofafilm
havetherightnottohavetheirworksubjectedtoderogatorytreatment.Thetreatmentofa
work will be derogatory if it amounts to distortion or mutilation of the work or is otherwise
prejudicial to the honour or reputation of the author or director. The right exists to prevent
injurytotheownerandprotectthereputationofanartist.[xiv]
7/20
8/7/2016
Even if the author of a copyright work has assigned (legally transferred) or otherwise dealt
withtherightsinthework,thisdoesnotgivethenewownerofcopyrightafreereintodeal
withtheworkinanymannertheythinkfit.
Mostcommercialagreementsthatdealwiththecopyrightinaworkalsocontainwaiversof
the moral right to object to derogatory treatment of the work. There are certain exceptions.
Forexample,thisrightdoesnotapplytocomputerprogramsorcomputergeneratedworksor
to works made for the purpose of reporting current events or to publication of a work in a
newspaper,magazine,periodicalorotherreferenceworkwheretheworkhasbeenmadefor
suchapurposeorwasusedwiththeauthorsconsent.
OtherSubsidiaryRights
Outsideofthesetwotraditionalmoralrightscategories,additionalmoralrightsexistinsome
circumstances.Theseincludetherighttocreateawork,therighttopublishawork,theright
towithdrawapublishedworkfromsale,therighttopreventexcessivecriticismofawork,
andtherighttopreventanyotherviolationoftheauthorspersonality.Theseadditionalmoral
rightsaresaidtobeprotectedunderthedualistorclassicalFrenchtheory.
MORALRIGHTSININDIA
IndianPositiononmoralRights:
In Indian copyright Act, 1957, the provision related to moral rights has been given. Indian
copyrightdoesnotdirectlyprovidesmoralrightstotheauthorbutitprovidesspecialrightto
author, that are moral rights. These rights are independent and parallel of the authors
economicrights.ThisprovisionisbasedonArticle6bisofBernConvention.[xv]
Thelanguageofsection57isofwideaptitudeandincludesnotjustliteraryworksbutalso
visualandaudiomanifestations.Themoralrightsareasfollows:
1.Paternityright(righttoclaimauthorshipofthework)
2.Theintegrityright(therighttoprotecthishonourandreputation)
3.Ageneralright(nottohaveaworkfalselyattributedtohim)
The commissioners right of privacy in respect of photograph or film made fir private and
domesticpurpose.Undersection57ofIndiancopyright,onauthorhastherighttoclaimthe
authorship of the work. He has also right to for restraining the infringement or to claim
damagesundersection55.[xvi]Thespecialprotectionofthecopyrightcanbeclaimedeven
aftertheassignmentofthecopyright.
8/20
8/7/2016
The author of a work has the right to claim authorship of the work and to restrain or claim
damages in respect of any distortion, mutilation, modification or other act in relation to the
work, if such distortion, mutilation, modification or other act is prejudicial to his honour or
reputation. Moral rights are available to the authors even after the economic rights are
assigned.(Section57)
It is a statutory recognition of the special care with which the intellectual property is
protected.Theprovisotosection57statesthattheauthorwillnothavetherighttorestrainor
claimdamagesinrespectofanyadaptationofacomputerprogrammebyalawfulpossessor
of a copy of a computer programme, to utilise the computer programme for which it was
suppliedandtomakebackupcopiesasatemporaryprotectionagainstloss.Bytheproviso,
thissectionalsoconfersthespecialrightsontheauthorsofcomputerprogrammes.[xvii]
Acomputerprogrammeisdefinedtomeanasetofinstructionsexpressedinwords,codes,
scheme,orinanyotherformincludingamachine,orrecordablemediumcapableofcausing
acomputertoperformaparticulartaskorachieveaparticularresult.(Section2(ffc).
Under section 57, the author has a right to restrain infringement or claim damages for
infringement of the copyright. This section provides an exception to the rule that after an
authorhaspartedwithhisrightsinfavourofapublisherorotherperson,thelatteraloneis
entitled to sue in respect of infringement. These rights are independent of the authors
copyrightandtheremediesopentotheauthorunderSection55(relatingtoinfringementofa
copyright).
Section 57 clearly overrides the terms of the contract of assignment of the copyright. The
contractofassignmentwouldbereadsubjecttotheprovisionsofsection57andthetermsof
contract cannot negate the special rights and remedies guaranteed by section 57. The
assigneeofacopyrightcannotclaimanyrightsorimmunitiesbasedonthecontract,which
areinconsistentwiththeprovisionsofSection57.
Thissectionprohibitsanydistortion,mutilationorothermodificationoftheauthorswork.The
words other modification are ejusdem generis with the word distortion and mutilation.
The modification should not be so serious that the modified form of the work looks quite
differentworkfromtheoriginal.Modificationinthesenseoftheperversionoftheoriginal,
willamounttodistortionormutilation.[xviii]
ThecourthastakenviewinthecaseofMannuBhandarivs.KalaVikasPicturesLtd.[xix]
InManuBhandaricase,thedisputerelatedtoauthorsmoralrightcamebeforethecourt.In
this case the plaintiff, MannuBhandare is author of Hindi novel AapkaBunty she assigned
her some rights in raised objection about the title of the film which was resolved by the
9/20
8/7/2016
partiesandtheendofthefilm.
Intheendofthenovelthechildwasadmittedinhostelbyhisnaturalfatherwhileinthefilmit
wasshowedthatthechilddiedofstarvation,theauthorsaidthatitwasagainstherintegrity
and honour. It was held that the contract of assignment has to be read subject to the
provisionsofsection5.
It held that the remedy of a restraint order or damages can be claimed even after the
assignment either wholly or partially of the said damages further it was held that the
section57.Clearlyoverridesthetermsofthecontractofassignmentofthecopyright.
Section57(I)(c)prohibitsanymutilationordistortionoftheauthorswork.Section27provides
thebundleofrights,whichareintunewiththeinternationalagreementsandthetreaties.
InthecaseK.P.M.SundaramVs.RattanPrakashanMandir[xx],theplaintiffhadinstitutedthe
suitagainstthedefendantsforinjunctionrestrainingthemfromprompting,publishingandthe
specifiedbooks,renditionandaccountsfortheillegalgainsmadebythedefendantsforall
unauthorized publications and for damages under the provisions of section 5 and 57. The
plaintiff had granted sole and exclusive right to print, publish and exclusive right to print,
publishandsellthework.Inlastclauseitwasfurthersoleandexclusiverighttoprint,publish
andsellthework.Primafacieitwasheldthatitdidnotassigneethecopyrightbutcreateda
revocable license in favour of defendants to publish and sell the works and the balance of
favourtoshowthesame.Thedefendantwasrestrainedfromprinting.Publishingandselling
theplaintifftillthedisposalofsuit.[xxi]
Moralrightsareseldomamatteroflegaldispute.Onesuchaveryfarreaching
caseisAmarNathSehgalV.UnionofIndia&Anr[xxii]
FactualBackground:
Mr.AmarNathSehgalistheworldrenownedsculpturistandhasbeenconferredwithseveral
awards for his beautiful creations and contribution to the Indian heritage. In the year 1957,
theGovernmentofIndiacommissionedMr.Sehgalforthecreatingbronzemuralforthemost
prominentInternationalConventionHallintheCapitaloftheCountry.
TheBronzesculptureofabout140ft.spanand40ft.sweeptookfiveyearstocompleteand
wasplacedonthewalloftheLobbyintheConventionhall.Thisembellishmentonanational
architecturebecameapartoftheIndianartheritage.
The background of the present dispute was set in the year 1979 when government pulled
downthesculpturefromthewallsofVigyanBhawananddumpeditinthestoreroom.
10/20
8/7/2016
When Mr. Sehgal came to know of this ill treatment, he made representations to the
government authorities for restoration of the mural. Unfortunately, all his pleas fell on deaf
ears.Aggrievedby the apathyof the government officials, Mr. Seghal filedapetitioninthe
DelhiHighCourtforrecognitionandenforcementofhisrightsonthemural.[xxiii]
Contentionsoftheparties
Mr.Seghalcontendedthatthemuralcreatedbyhimwasapartofthenationalheritageand
hencewasvaluablenotonlyforhimbutfortheentirecountry.Themutilationoftheworkwas
prejudicial to his reputation as it reduced the volume of the corpus of his work. He further
arguedthatwheretherighttointegrityisviolated,theremedyisnotlimitedtoinjunctionor
damages. The author has the right to preserve the mutilated work as well. Mr. Sehgal
contendedthathissuitwasnotbarredbylimitationashismoralrightssubsistthroughouthis
life.Allthroughtheinterposingperiodof13years,hewasseekingadministrativerelief.
Mr. Sehgal prayed for the relief of permanent injunction for restraining Union of India from
further distorting or mutilating the mural and a sum of Rs. 50 lac as compensation for
humiliation, hurt, injury and loss of reputation caused to him. Mr. Sehgal also prayed for a
decreeofdeliveryup,directingUOItoreturnthemuraltohimandalsobearthecostofsuch
restoration.
UOI, on the other hand, argued that it was the owner of the mural and had the right to
consign the work to the storeroom. The mural was taken from the Mr. Sehgal for a good
considerationandtherefore,hehadnorightoverthemural.Alsothelegalactionwasbarred
by limitation as the suit was filed after a period of 13 years from the date when cause of
actionarose.
Issuesfordetermination
ThemainissuesfordeterminationbeforetheCourtwere(a)whetherthesuitwasbarredby
limitation (b) whether Mr. Sehgal had moral right over the mural even when the copyright
vestedwiththeUOI(c)HasUOIinfringedmoralrightsofMr.Sehgal(d)whetherMr.Sehgal
hassufferedanydamage(e)Relief.
Decision
On the question as to whether the suit was barred by limitation, the Court ruled that the
correspondencebetweenUOIandMr.Sehgalcontaintheacknowledgementbytheformerof
the right of the latter over the mural and therefore the suit is not barred by limitation. The
Court examined at length the national and the international framework for protection of the
moral rights of the Author. The Court was of the opinion that it is a narrow view the
11/20
8/7/2016
derogatory treatment of the creative work would mean deletion to, distortion, mutilation or
modification to, or the use of the work in setting which is entirely inappropriate. The broad
viewisthatmutilationisnothingbutthedestructionoftheworkastorenderitimperfectand
isthereforeprejudicialtothereputationoftheauthor.
RecognizingthemoralrightsoftheMr.SehgalovertheMural,PradeepNandrajogJ.ruled:
muralwhateverbeitsformtodayistooprecioustobereducedtoscrapandlanguishinthe
warehouseoftheGovernmentofIndia.ItisonlyMr.Sehgalwhohastherighttorecreatehis
workandthereforehastherighttoreceivethebrokendownmural.
Healsohastherighttobecompensatedforthelossofreputation,honourandmentalinjury
duetotheoffendingactsofUOI.
TheCourtpassedmandatoryinjunctionagainsttheUOIdirectingittoreturnthemuraltoMr.
Sehgalwithintwoweeksfromthedateofjudgment.Courtpassedadeclarationtransferring
all the rights over the mural from UOI to Mr. Sehgal and an absolute right to recreate the
muralandsellthesame.TheCourtalsogranteddamagestothetuneofRs.5lacsandcost
ofsuittoMr.SehgalagainstUOI.[xxiv]
TheCourthasgivenawideconstructiontothemoralrightsoftheauthorunderthecopyright
law.TheStatuteonlyprovidesforthegrantofinjunctionanddamagesincaseswhereany
distortion, mutilation, modification or other act in relation to the work if such distortion etc
would be prejudicial to his honour or reputation. Court has read into the forgoing provision
therightoftheauthortoreceivethecopyrightedworkforthepurposesofrestorationandsell
it.Theratioofthecaseisestablishesthepropositionthatwheretheowner(notbeingthe
author)ofthecopyrightwork,treatstheworkinamannerthatisprejudicialtothereputation
andhonouroftheauthor,theCourtmaytransferallrightsovertheworktotheauthor.
Describingtheaspectsofmoralrightsprotecttheinterestofauthorinmaintaintheirstanding
and reputation. In India, the statues and the ruling of the courts indicate only integrity right
andpaternityrightsasmoralrightsasfarasIndiaaloneisconcerned,thoughthelegislation
inthisregardhasbeenlimitedintheIndiastatuteoncopyrightbutthecourtsarefavouringa
widerinterpretationoftheserights.
CONCLUSION
The moral rights required to be protected under the Berne Convention, Article 6bis are the
Right of Paternity and the Right of Integrity. These rights have been primarily adopted
fromthecivillawjurisdictionswhicharemoreauthorcentric,likeFranceandGermany.They
considercopyrighttobemoreofapersonalrightoftheauthorofthework,givinghimcredit
forhisintellectualeffortandcreativity.TheRightofPaternityorAttributiongivesthecopyright
12/20
8/7/2016
ownerarighttoclaimauthorshipoftheworkandtheRightofIntegritygivestheowneraright
topreventanydistortionoftheworkwhichwouldbepotentiallyharmfultothereputationand
honour of the right holder. Under the Right of Paternity a copyright owner can claim due
creditforanyofhisworks.Thus,ifamoviehasbeenbasedonabookbyanauthor,buthe
hasntbeengivenduecreditinit,hecansuethemakerstoacknowledgehiswork.TheRight
toIntegritywouldprotectarightholderifsomeonedistorted,mutilatedormodifiedhisworkin
a way that it is harmful for his reputation and name. Economic rights can be licensed, but
moral rights cannot. They remain with the author even if he has assigned or licensed his
other rights. Therefore, altering or modifying any work may amount to infringement of an
authors Right of Integrity unless written consent has been obtained for the same or it is
reasonable under the circumstances to do so. Moral rights are protected more vigilantly in
civillawcountries.Infact,inUSA,moralrightsareonlyrecognizedforvisualworksandnot
for literary or musical works. Moral rights are considered more of a part of the law of
defamationrelatingtolibelandslanderanddonotgetmuchimportanceotherwise.
Describingtheaspectsofmoralrightsprotecttheinterestofauthorinmaintaintheirstanding
and reputation. In India, the statues and the ruling of the courts indicate only integrity right
andpaternityrightsasmoralrightsasfarasIndiaaloneisconcerned,thoughthelegislation
inthisregardhasbeenlimitedintheIndiastatuteoncopyrightbutthecourtsarefavouringa
widerinterpretationoftheserights.
[i]http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/asaccessedon25thOct,14.
[ii]http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/6bis.htmlasaccessedon25thOct,14.
[iii]http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l195CopyrightLawinIndia.html as accessed on
25thOct,14.
[iv]ibid
[v]http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/authorsmoralright8081.html
as
accessedon25thOct,14.
[vi]ibid
[vii]http://spicyip.com/2008/01/moralrightsundercopyrightlawspeep.html as accessed on
25thOct,14.
[viii]Wadhwa, Dr. B.L., Law relating to Intellectual Property Rights, Universal Law
PublicationCo.,FourthEdition.Pg.no.303.
13/20
8/7/2016
[ix]ibid
[x]DelhiHighCourt2005PTC(30)253
[xi]Ahuja, V.K., Law Relating To Intellectual Property Rights, Lexis Nexis Publications,
SecondEdition,2013.Pg.no.80.
[xiii]SupraNote5.
[xiv]SupraNote10.Pg.no.80
[xv]Ahuja, V.K., Law Relating To Intellectual Property Rights, Lexis Nexis Publications,
SecondEdition,2013.Pg.no.81.
[xvi]http://www.ebcindia.com/lawyer/articles/2003v8a3.htmasaccessedon25thOct,14.
[xvii]http://copyright.lawmatters.in/2010/07/gettingmoralrightswaived.html as accessed on
25thOct,14.
[xviii]Radhakrishnan, Dr. R., Intellectual Property Right, Excel Books India Ltd., First
Edition,NewDelhi,2008.Pg.no.155.
[xix]AIR1987Del13.
[xx]AIR.1983Del.461
[xxi]http://bizandlegis.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/moralrightsinindia/ as accessed on 25th
Oct,14.
[xxii]2005(30)PTC253
[xxiii]http://www.lawinfowire.com/articleinfo/amarnathsehgalvunionindiadelhihighcourt
2005ptc30253asaccessedon25thOct,14.
[xxiv]http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1990275/asaccessedon25thOct,14.

14/20
8/7/2016
Youmayalsolike:
GLOBALIZATION WORKINGOF
ANDHUMAN
COPYRIGHT
RIGHTS
BOARDIN
INDIA
Globalizationand
HumanRights
WorkingOf
CopyrightBoardin
India
ARTICLE21OF
THE
CONSTITUTION
OFINDIA
RIGHTTOLIFE
AND
PERSONAL
LIBERTY
Article21ofthe
ConstitutionofIndia
RighttoLifeand
PersonalLiberty
HINDUWOMEN
ANDCHANGES
TOWARDS
PROPERTY
RIGHTS
HinduWomenand
changestowards
PropertyRights
IMMUNITY
COPYRIGHT
TAXATIONOF
AGAINSTSELF INFRINGEMENT COMPANIES
INCRIMINATION BYISPS
ImmunityAgainst
SelfIncrimination
Copyright
infringementbyISPs
Taxationof
Companies
WannaKnowHowto
MakeRs.
6,302/Day?
CareerTimes
AdsbyShareaholic
15/20
8/7/2016
FiledUnder:Copyright,IntellectualPropertyRights
TaggedWith:copyright,IPR,moralrights,rights
Leave a Reply
Youremailaddresswillnotbepublished.Requiredfieldsaremarked*
Name*
Email*
Website
Comment
YoumayusetheseHTMLtagsandattributes:<ahref=""title=""><abbrtitle="">
<acronymtitle=""><b><blockquotecite=""><cite><code><deldatetime="">
<em><i><qcite=""><strike><strong>
POSTCOMMENT
16/20
8/7/2016
SEARCH
CATEGORIES
DirectTaxation
ADR
Arbitration&ConciliationAct
BankingLaw
Bankruptcy&Insolvency
BiotechnologyLaw
BusinessLaws
CivilProcedureCode&Lawof
Limitation
CodeofCriminalProcedure
competition
CompetitionLaw
Constitutional&AdministrativeLaw
ConsumerProtectionAct
ContractLaw
Copyright
CorporateFinance
CorporateGovernance
CriminalLaw
CriminologyandVictimology
EconomicOffences
Economics
EnvironmentalLaw
FamilyLaw
GenderandLaw
17/20
8/7/2016
HumanitarianandRefugeeLaw
Humanities
IndianEvidenceAct
IndianPenalCode
InformationTechnologyLaw
InsuranceLaw
IntellectualPropertyRights
InternationalCommercialArbitration
InternationalEnvironmentalLaw
InternationalHumanRightsLaw
InternationalLabourLaws
InternationalLaw
InternationalOrganization
InternationalTradeLaw
InternationalTreatyArbitration
InterpretationofStatutes
InvestmentLaw
IPRinPharmaIndustry
Jurisprudence
LabourLaw
LandAcquisition
LawandEconomics
LawoftheSea
LawofTorts
LegalHistory
LegalMethods
LegalServicesAuthoritiesAct/Lok
Adalats
MaritimeLaw
Media&CyberLaw
Mediation
Merger&Acquisition
OffencesAgainstChild&Juvenile
Offence
18/20
8/7/2016
Patents
Penology&Victimology
PoliticalScience
PrivateInternationalLaw
ProbationandParole
ProceduralLaws
PropertyLaw
PublicInternationalLaw
SecuritiesLaw
Sociology
SpaceLaw
SpecialContract
TaxLaw
Trademarks
Uncategorized
WhiteCollarCrime
Women&CriminalLaw
RECENT POSTS
ScopeofEnforcementofDPSPs
ContractsandQuasiContracts
Thesettingredsunofdarkwater
MedicalNegligence
ComparisonOfTrialProcedure
BetweenIndianCourtsAndFranch
Courts
Copyright2016GenesisFrameworkWordPressLogin
19/20
8/7/2016
20/20

Moral Rights of Author - Academike

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Moral Rights of Author - Academike

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

8/7/2016

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi