In a historic (not necessarily just) judgment , the Delhi High Court has held that photocopying books is not an infringement of publishers' / authors' rights. Some activists and intellectual property lawyers are justifying this view as paramountcy of public good over private rights.
This view is debatable. Just as private rights cannot be at the cost of public good, public good also cannot be to the detriment of private rights. If there is no restraint on photocopying, publishers of books will have no incentive to continue their business. In the process, public will lose in the long run. The judge should have empathised with the publishers a little more.
Interestingly, the name of the judge who pronounced this judgment is Rajiv Sahai Endlaw.
This view is debatable. Just as private rights cannot be at the cost of public good, public good also cannot be to the detriment of private rights. If there is no restraint on photocopying, publishers of books will have no incentive to continue their business. In the process, public will lose in the long run. The judge should have empathised with the publishers a little more.
Interestingly, the name of the judge who pronounced this judgment is Rajiv Sahai Endlaw.
No comments:
Post a Comment