The Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, on March 30, 2021 notified The Copyright (Amendment) Rules, 2021 which amends the Copyright Rules, 2013 to introduce certain changes in the administration of Copyright Law in India.

The Amendment introduces measures to digitize the whole process of functioning of the Copyright Office. A Copyright Journal has been introduced to be maintained at the Official Website of the Copyright Office which would replace the Official Gazette. Moreover, applications for license can also be served through electronic means, in addition to registered post, to the owner of the Copyright. Electronic mode of payment has also been introduced.

Changes have also been introduced for administration of Copyright Societies under the Act. The period of registration of Copyright Societies by the Central Government has been increased from 60 days to 180 days. A new Annual Transparency Report has been introduced through the Amendment. An annual transparency report needs to be maintained and published by the Copyright Societies for each financial year, within 6 months following the end of that financial year on their website for at least 3 years. A list of particulars that needs to be there in the report is also mentioned in the Amendment.

Further, the Amendments also aim to bring about transparency in the management of royalties collected and distributed by the Copyright Societies. The Copyright Societies shall need to establish a traceable electronic system of payment for collection and distribution of royalties. Undistributed royalties in lieu of non identification or traceability of the owner of Copyright is required to be kept in a separate account of the Copyright Society and make all possible efforts to locate such owners. The undistributed fund would need to be transferred to the welfare fund upon expiry of 3 years, if the owner could not be traced. The Code of Conduct rules for Copyright Societies has also been revised to require every society to additionally update a searchable database of Society’s repertoire, Annual Transparency report and the details of undistributed royalties.

New provisions have been made to substantially reduce the compliance requirement for the registration of a Computer Programme. Now, the applicant can file at least first 10 and last 10 pages of source code, or the entire source code if less than 20 pages, with no blocked out or redacted portions. Chapter XVI dealing with ‘Importation of Infringing Copies’ has been omitted along with other relevant amendments to forms and schedules.

The notified Amendment Rules can be accessed at:

https://copyright.gov.in/Documents/Notification/Copyright-Rules_Amendment_2021.pdf

The Department of Electronics and Information Technology released the ‘Framework and Guidelines for Use of Social Media for Government Organizations’ in February 2021. The main objective of the Framework is to encourage and enable government agencies to make proper use of social media platforms for communication with the general public. To fulfil this objective, the guidelines elaborate upon the platforms available for interaction, rules of engagement with the public and manner of interaction.

For the creation of a social media account, the Framework recommended that the same name be used for social media accounts across the spectrum. The maintenance of an official record of the IDs and passwords of these accounts is also suggested. To engage with the general public, the Framework proposes the usage of either an official account or the private accounts of government officials for posting official responses. However, it would have to be ascertained whether the response is in an official or personal capacity.

The responsiveness factor stipulated in the Framework indicates the frequency in which the content would be updated, the manner of posting the content and the turnaround time of responses. The scope of responses ought to be stated as far as possible. The Framework considers some factors which a government agency should keep in mind while developing a response policy- keeping the posts crisp and concise, the government official identifying themselves while not disclosing confidential information etc. The congruence between traditional media and social media has been reiterated throughout the Framework.

The Framework outlines the nature of content posted on the social media platforms. It was suggested that the content posted on the platforms be available in a myriad of Indian languages and not be limited to text itself. In the event that the content posted is not exclusively by the governmental agency, the content has to be moderated. The moderation policy should include points with respect to copyright infringement as well as rights to addition and deletion by the agency. Record management of the content is a relevant factor mentioned in the Framework.

Under the Framework, government agencies have to consider certain caveats while following the recommendations made, such as the creation and operation of the social media accounts in an official capacity, dedication of a speedy-response team and the adherence with the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Right to Information Act, 2005.

The Framework can be accessed at :
https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Approved%20Social%20Media%20Framework
%20and%20Guidelines%20_2_.pdf

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP

The Patents and Designs Protection Act of 1872 was established to protect industrial designs. The amended rules were formally notified on January 25, 2021.

To begin with prior to the amendment, the Design Rules allowed for a design classification based on the Locarno Classification’s 10th Edition. With the amendment, designs in India will now be identified according to the Locarno Classification’s current edition. There are 32 classes and 237 subclasses in the most recent version of the Classification. As a result of the amendment, the Design Rules are to be modified to include class 32, which previously included only 31 classes.

The Amendment Rules have also introduced the section of Section 2(eb) defining a “start-up” as “an entity in India recognised as a start-up by the competent authority under Start up India initiative” . The Amendment Rules also enable foreign companies to assert the status of startups if they meet the criteria: “for turnover and period of incorporation or registration as per Start-up India Initiative and submitting declaration to that effect” Further, The Reserve Bank of India’s reference rates for foreign currency shall be used to measure the turnover requirements, according to the clarification attached to clause (eb).

Another amendment concerns the address for service of documents as mentioned in Rule 4 of the previous rules, prior to the amendment of January 25th 2021.The proviso to Rule 4 is replaced by Rule 3 of the amending laws, which allows mobile numbers registered in India to be used as a sufficient mode of service of documents. The next amendment involves the award of cost by the Controller. In proceedings before the Controller, Rule 43 of the Principal Rules requires the Controller to grant fair costs. Such expenses must be in accordance with the amount and matters specified in the fourth schedule of the unaltered rules. Rule 9 of the amended rules substitutes the fourth schedule with a schedule that incorporates the costs allowable in proceedings for start-ups.

The final amendments involve the registration of fees and modification of schedules. The fees payable with regard to registration of designs and associated matters is specified in the First Schedule of the unamended rules. As per the previous Design Rules, , the appropriate fees payable depended upon the type of entity , the applicant was identified as. Now , as per the amended rules, all natural persons, small entities recognized under the MSME Act, and startups will receive rebates of up to 50% or more for fees payable for various applications and claims under the First Schedule under the revised Design Rules.

The notified rules can be accessed at: https://ipindia.gov.in/writereaddata/Portal/Images/pdf/The_Designs__amendment___Rules__2021.pdf

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) notified on February 25, 2021, the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (‘Rules’). The Rules now supersede the earlier Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011. As per a press release issued by the MeitY, the Rules were enacted in collaboration with the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB), owing to concerns among the public on transparency, accountability and rights of users on digital media, including social media, OTT platforms, etc.

Part I differentiates between a ‘social media intermediary’ and a ‘significant social media intermediary’. A social media intermediary is defined as “an intermediary which primarily or solely enables online interaction between two or more users and allows them to create, upload, share, disseminate, modify or access information using its services” whereas a significant social media intermediary is defined as having “a number of registered users in India above such threshold as notified by the Central Government”.

Part II, to be administered by the MeitY, lays down a list of due diligence to be observed by intermediaries while discharging their duties [Rule 3(1)] and mandates a grievance redressal mechanism to be put in place [Rule 3(2)]. Rules 4 and 5 lay down additional lists of due diligence to be observed by significant social media intermediaries, and in relation to news and current affairs content. The Rules also provide for the Ministry to require any intermediary, which is not a significant social media intermediary to comply with all or any of the obligations applicable to a significant social media intermediary [Rule 6]. Rule 7 lays down that if an intermediary fails to comply with these rules, the safe-harbour provision under Section 79(1) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 shall not be applicable to it.

Part III, to be administered by the MIB, sets out the Code of Ethics and Procedure and Safeguards in relation to Digital Media, specifically applicable to publishers of news and current affairs content and publishers of online curated content. Rule 10 lays down the process for furnishing and processing of grievance. The Rules also call for the creation of a three-tier grievance redressal mechanism:

• Level I- Self- Regulation by Publishers [Rule 11].
• Level II- Self-Regulating Bodies of Publishers [Rule 12]
• Level III- Oversight Mechanism of the Central Government [Rule 13]

The Rules also lay down, in the appendix, a specific Code of Ethics for news and current affairs and online curated content and certain issue specific guidelines, such as for discrimination, nudity, etc.

The guidelines could be accessed here: www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Intermediary_Guidelines_and_Digital_Media_Ethics_Code_Rules-2021.pdf

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP

In October 2020, India and South Africa filed a joint proposal before World Trade Organization (WTO) Council seeking  waiver of  certain provisions of Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement.[1] The proposal seeks waiver from  implementation, application and enforcement of Section 1 (Copyrights and related rights), Section 4 (Industrial Designs), Section 5 (Patents), and Section 7 (Protection of undisclosed information) of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement in relation to prevention, containment or treatment of COVID-19.  The proposed waiver appears to be owing to “…an urgent call for global solidarity, and the unhindered global sharing of technology and know-how in order that rapid responses for the handling of COVID-19 can be put in place on a real time basis.”

The waiver is requested until widespread vaccination is in place globally, and the majority of the world’s population has developed immunity. The only exception to the claimed waiver is its application to protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms (Sound Recordings) and Broadcasting Organizations under Article 14 of the TRIPS Agreement.

It is important to maintain the fair balance between public health and intellectual property rights. Accordingly, the proposal is a great initiative in the time of pandemic as currently,  global integration is an utmost necessity. There are many countries involved in domestic research with respect to COVID-19 related vaccines and it is important for least developed countries or the countries with lack of resources to have fair access to the vaccine. Although Article 31bis of TRIPS allows special compulsory license by way of which drugs or vaccines could be exported to other members, the proposed waiver from TRIPS would avoid the hassle of getting into the complicated and time-consuming structure of Article 31bis. Moreover, Article 31bis is only applicable to pharmaceutical products, and hence it is questionable if it in itself is sufficient to deal with the challenges of COVID-19, which demands other medical products and equipment, apart from just pharmaceutical products.

Notably, the proposal is not limited only to waiver from patents related provisions, but also seeks waiver from Sections 1 (Copyrights and related rights) and Section 4 (Industrial Designs) of the TRIPS Agreement. While it is note-worthy that the proposal acknowledges intellectual property rights other than patents pose a barrier in the backdrop of COVID-19, it does not elaborate much on the issue. It is worth deliberating whether the waiver from the copyright and design related provisions is the need of the hour and whether it will fulfil the purpose behind the proposal viz. prevention, containment or treatment of COVID-19. 

[1] https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/SS/directdoc.aspx?filename=q:/IP/C/W669.pdf&Open=True

Disclaimer: Views, opinions, interpretations are solely those of the author, not of the firm (ALG India Law Offices LLP) nor reflective thereof. Author submissions are not checked for plagiarism or any other aspect before being posted.

Copyright: ALG India Law Offices LLP