Case Analysis: Bhaktivedanta Book Trust V. Bhagvatam.In

26th August, 2024 - 7:02 am Categories: Copyright 0 Comments

Introduction

The plaintiff, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, filed a lawsuit seeking a permanent injunction to prevent copyright infringement, along with damages, against several John Doe websites and mobile applications (the Defendants) for unauthorized distribution of the plaintiff’s copyrighted works.

The court recognized that piracy occurred across multiple languages in which the plaintiff’s work was published. It was held that such misappropriation of intellectual property could not be condoned since it would cause financial harm to the plaintiff. Therefore, the court ordered an interim injunction preventing reproduction, distribution or transmission by the defendants of any portion of the plaintiffs’ works whether in print, audio-visual or electronic formats through means like websites, mobile apps and social media platforms as this would infringe on the plaintiffs’ copyrights.

Facts of the Case

The Plaintiff, a religious organisation founded by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, a prominent spiritual scholar and an author of several religious books including inter alia the ‘Srimad Bhagavatam’, was established as a trust by the author. He was also the founder of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. The Plaintiff had numerous copyright registrations in its works and disseminated the works to the public through religious institutions and the internet. Some of these works were copyrighted and the Plaintiff was paid royalties from the sales and utilization of these works in the commercial market.

[Image Sources: Shutterstock]

The Plaintiff alleged that several defendants, including websites, mobile applications, and Instagram accounts, were unlawfully reproducing its copyrighted works on various online platforms. One of the defendants even hosted an infringing mobile applications on the Google Play Store.

The Plaintiff argued that the Defendants lacked any license to reproduce its copyrighted works, and their deception was evident by falsely citing the Plaintiff as the source.

The Plaintiff further made a claim that the revenue, which it generated from the sales and distribution of, its copyrighted material, was put back to its charitable use. It argued that a reproduction of its works by the Defendants is wrongful and should be ceased since the latter have no licenses or rights to its works.

Court’s Decision

In this judgment Delhi High court clarified that scriptures like Bhagavad Gita which are the original work on religion and spirituality come under public domain and do not fall under the ambit of Section 3 of the Copyright Act. Nonetheless, it was emphasised that any elaborative or interpretative derivatives of such texts can be defined as ‘’transformative works. ’ Copyright protection, therefore, applies only to the original elements of these adaptations that go beyond mere reproduction of the public domain scriptures.

In this case, the court found that the defendants had engaged in large-scale piracy by not only copying the original scripture but also reproducing the unique presentations, summaries, introductions, and other original materials created by the plaintiff. This constituted copyright infringement.

As a result, the court ordered the defendants to cease copying and distributing the plaintiff’s work and to remove it from their websites and mobile applications.

The court essentially recognized that while the original text of a scripture is in the public domain and free for anyone to use, the creative work involved in interpreting or presenting that scripture can be protected as intellectual property.

A Doctrinal Analysis

1. Merger Doctrine

Merger doctrine that comes from the dichotomy of idea-expression protects only expression of ideas not the ideas themselves. If an idea is inextricably tied to its expression then the latter cannot be copyrighted according to this doctrine. In the case of Chancellor Masters of Oxford v. Narendra Publishing House, the court applied merger doctrine when an idea could be expressed only within limited number of forms.

The merger doctrine can be used when considering applying copyright protection to religious texts or not. Religious followers often express their sacred scriptures in very narrow ways which are vital for preserving their religious truths intact.Rather, some scripts are direct orders to adherents and thus, they cannot be rephrased without compromising on their intended meaning.Resultantly, it would amount to denial of copyright protection for holy verses if merger doctrine was applied because there is no way one could separate ideas therein from their expressions.

2. Fair Use Doctrine

The fair use doctrine allows for the limited utilization of copyrighted works without the permission of the copyright holder, thus acting as a limitation on exclusive rights. Whether there is a fair use depends on factors such as; the purpose and character of use, nature of the work, amount taken and effect upon potential market value.

Arguments favouring an extension of copyright protection to sacred scriptures have been based on such considerations with suggestion that reproductions for teaching or commentary could fall within fair use. In America, some think that religious purposes can be included under fair use because it is flexible enough. However, this stance does not apply in India. Indian Copyright law follows ‘fair dealing’ model than ‘fair use’ doctrine.

In India, religious usage isn’t part of the copyright exceptions outlined under Section 52 of Copyright Act. The reproduction right for educational purposes or examinations is envisaged by section 52(1)(i) whereas section 52(1)(j) allows performances of literary or dramatic works but only within educational institutions. This means that “teaching” must be understood narrowly in an educational context and does not go to include religious activities. The Court’s interpretation in Chancellor Masters confirms that ‘instruction’ is limited to educational settings, and thus, religious uses do not fall within the fair dealing provisions.

Conclusion

The analysis shows that copyright protection to sacred scriptures poses huge legal challenges and endangers the basic principles of copyright law. In line with these considerations, the Bhaktivedanta Trust decision is remarkable for its finding that religious texts should not be copyrighted. While it does not dwell on the intricacies of the law, this blog offers a strong justification for this choice, grounded both in theoretical and practical terms. It holds that religious texts are greater than exclusive rights. Thus, the judgment by Bhaktivedanta Trust opens up further possibilities for deepening discussions on religious materials and intellectual property rights.

Author: Ananya Agrawal, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at  Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.