WHEN COPYRIGHT ENDS AND COPYING BEGINS: ACRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SECTION 15 OF THE COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957 AND FASHION DESIGN PROTECTION IN INDIA

ABSTRACT

The fashion industry is largely driven by innovation creativity and originality, making the protection of fashion designs an important legal concern in India fashion designs are primarily protected through the copyright act,1957 and the designs act, 2000.however the interaction between these laws, particularly under the section 15 of the copyright act, this has led to several legal debates. This article examines the role of section 15 in fashion design protection and analysis whether the existing legal framework will safeguard the interest of the fashion designers. Through an analysis of relevant legal provision and judicial decisions, this article finds that the section 15 aims to prevent overlapping protection, it may also create practical difficulties for designers this article concludes that a more balanced approach is required to protect creativity by maintaining fair competition in the fashion industry.

Keywords: copyright act 1957, fashion design protection, section 15, intellectual property right , design act 2000, fashion law, copyright protection

1.INTRODUCTION

The creation, production, marketing, sale and protection of fashion products and design is governed by the branch of law known as the fashion law. Generally, fashion law around the world is not constituted as a single statute. Instead, it is an interdisciplinary combination of several areas of law that affect the fashion business such as copyright, design rights, trademark, contract, competition law etc.

Considering that fashion is one of the most dynamic industries in the world yet it is relatively underexplored in Indian legal framework as the industry continues to evolve with various trend, creativity and originality have become the foundation of commercial success of fashion. still no country has a codified standalone fashion in law that governs the entire fashion industry. However, some country has special protection aimed at fashion design which comes closer to dedicated fashion law framework.

For say, the EU is considered as most fashion friendly jurisdiction it provides registered community design [RCD] and unregistered community design which is very useful because trend change quickly where a designer can launch a collection and immediately receive protection without even filing paper works which is why many considered this as the closest thing to a specialized fashion design protection system

France is another country which is called as the one of the most fashion protective country because of its strong copyright protection .as it plays a significant role in luxury fashion, court have been very receptive to protecting fashion creations where as the US is famous for its comparatively weaker protection for the same.

India is generally not considered as a highly protective jurisdiction by designers compared to non-protective jurisdiction its biggest criticism is the section 15 of the copyright act.

2 BACKGROUNDS AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The copyright act 1957 serves as the primary legislation governing the protection of original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work granting the creators exclusive rights over the creations. Copyright protection arises automatically upon the creation of an original work and doesn’t require mandatory registration although registration serves as a evidence in legal proceedings usually in the fashion industry copyright law also plays an important role in protecting creative and artistic aspect of fashion design Section 2(c) of the copyright act defines artistic work broadly to include

• Painting
• Drawings
• Sketches
• Photography
• Sculpture
• Work of artistic craftsmanship
• Engravings

In fashion industry artistic work often form the foundation of design process the designers begin with sketches and illustrations that represent the creative ideas and embody the designers the intellectual effort and are therefore entitled for copyright protection under section 2(c) Right of copyright owner according to copyright act 1957

The copyright act 1957 provides several exclusive rights that allow for the proprietary usage of creative works these rights include

• Right of reproduction were the owner had the exclusive rights to reproduce the work in any material form un authorized copying of fashion sketches textile art work or embroidery leads to infringement
• Rights of adaptation whether owner may authorize adaptation or modification of the original work.
• Right of commercial exploitation allows the owner to licence or assigned their rights to manufactures, fashion houses or retailers for commercial use. The act also protect the moral right of a creator including the right to claim the author ship and the right to object any distortion or mutilation of the work or designs that may harm his reputation even though these rights provide legal protection against the unauthorised copying and exploitation of fashion creations the scope of such protections is limited when the artistic work is transformed into industrially produced designs bringing them with in the scope of design act and section 15 of copyright act

Section 15 (1) establishes that once a design is registered under the designs act protection is covered exclusively by the designs act and not by the copyright law at the same time section 15(2) applies where a design is capable of registration under the design act but has not been registered and the design has been reproduced more than 50 times through a industrial process when these conditions are fulfilled the copyright protection cease

3 LEGAL ANALYSIS

One of the major legal issues in the fashion law is the overlap between the copyright protection and the design protection. Fashion designs are very unique because they contain both artistic and commercial elements. A designer may first create a print, embroidery pattern or garment design as an artistic work which can receive protection under the copyright act 1957.however once a same design is applied to clothing and produced on a commercial scale, it may also fall under the designs act,2000.

• To address this overlap section 15of the copyright act was introduced the purpose of this provision is to ensure that a design does not receive protection under the both copyright law and design law. While this objective appears reasonable the practical application in the fashion world is not always straight forward.
• The most controversial aspect of section 15 is the” 50-copy rule “contained in the section 15(2). according to this provision if a design is capable to registered under the design act is reproduced more than 50 times so copyright protection comes to an end unless the design has been registered under the designs act
• “A practical difficulty arises when a fashion design achieves commercial success. The purpose of intellectual property law is to reward creativity, yet the section 15 may result in the loss of copyright protection once a design is reproduced on a large scale. This creates an interesting contradiction within the law”. many small and independent designers may not have the legal knowledge or resources to register every design under design act. as a result, they are facing a disadvantages
• Modern technology, social media, online shopping platforms have made it easier to identify and reproduce popular fashion trends. section 15 can indirectly contribute to this problem. Once a copyright protection ceases, competitors may initiate certain aspects of a design without necessarily violating copyright law. Even though it may not amount to infringement, it can still affect the original designer’s work. the law may technically permit the reproduction of certain designs even though they were originally created through substantial effort. as a result, many designers feel that the current law framework does not provide sufficient protection against counterfeit.
• Another important issue is that section 15 affects small and independent designers more than established fashion brands. Large fashion houses usually have the financial resources and legal support required to register their designs under the designs act,2000.however , many emerging designers may not be aware of the registration process or may not have the resources to obtain protection for every design they create .as a result ,they are often more vulnerable to copying and design piracy this create an imbalance within the fashion industry where large brands are in a better position to protect their creation than smaller designers
• A further challenge is that the distinction between artistic work and industrial designs is not always clear in the fashion industry. Most fashion designs begin as artistic sketches, creative concepts, illustrations but they are ultimately intended for commercial production and sale. Therefore, it becomes difficulty to determine the exact point at which copyright protection should end and design protection should begin. With the growth of ecommerce platform, and social media marketing, fast fashion, designs can be copied and reproduced with in a very short period of time. This raise concerns regarding whether the current legal framework adequately reflex realities of modern fashion industry and provide sufficient protection to original creator
• They need to reconsider whether the existing framework adequately protect fashion designers. the fifty copy may no longer affect the realities of modern fashion production. therefore, introducing specialized protection for fashion design could help to address the current challenges. although section 15 serves an important purpose by preventing overlapping intellectual property rights, it may also reveal several practical difficulties. this raises an important question as to whether the current legal framework truly provides adequate protection for fashion designers in India

4 CASE LAW DISCUSSION

4.1 Ritika private limited v Biba apparels private limited (Delhi high court, 2016)

This case is one of the important decisions relating to fashion design protection in India. Ritika private limited alleged that Biba apparels had copied the patterns and designs which were used in its garments and therefore infringed its copyright the plaintiff approached the court seeking protection under the copyright act, 1957.

The Delhi court observed that the designs were capable of registration under designs act, 2000 and had already been reproduced more than 50 times through an industrial process. as a result, section15(2) of the copyright act became applicable and the protection of copyright was no longer available. Therefore, the court dismissed the claim for copyright infringement. this judgement is highly relevant to this study because it highlights one of the major concerns surrounding to section 15. This case shows that once a fashion design becomes commercially successful and is produced on a large scale, copyright protection may cease to exist

.in my view this case clearly shows one of the practical difficulties created by section 15. A fashion design often becomes commercially valuable only after it gains popularity in the market. However, once the design is reproduced on a large scale, copyright protection may cease. This creates a situation where designers can lose protection at the very stage when their creation becomes most vulnerable to imitation

4.2 Microfibres Inc v Girdhar & co. (Delhi highcourt,2009)

In this case the dispute mainly concerned the artistic pattern that were applied to fabrics. The plaintiff argued that these patterns were artistic work and are protected under copyright law, on the other side the defendant argued that it should be treated as a industrial design.

The Delhi high court examined both the copyright law and design law which explains that both form of protection serves a different purpose. The court held that when an artistic work is applied to a product through an industrial process will be capable of registration under design act, the provision of section 15 becomes relevant

It explains how an artistic work can lose copyright protection once it is entered into a commercial production this principle is particularly relevant to the fashion industry because most of the fashion designs being as a creative artistic work but later it was manufactured and sold on a large scale

Both cases show the practical impact of section 15 on fashion design protection in India. while this provision was introduced to prevent overlapping protection under copyright and design law. This decision clearly shows that it can also leave designers with limited legal remedies this has contributed to the ongoing debate regarding whether the current legal framework adequately protect creativity in the fashion industry when their creation enters mass production. Therefore, this case supports the central arguments of this article that the section 15 was enacted to maintain a balance between competition and protection, its practical application may unintentionally create gaps that make the fashion design more vulnerable to copying.

5 CRITICAL ANALYSIS / FINDINGS

An analysis of section 15 of the copyright act ,1957 shows that the provision was introduced to prevent overlapping protection under copyright and design law, it creates certain practical difficulty in fashion industry One of the major difficulties is the fifty-copy rule under section 15(2). Once a design is capable to register under the design act and which is produced more than fifty times through a industrial process, then the copyright protection comes to an end however this provision aims to maintain distinction between artistic work and industrial designs, it may lead to disadvantages for the fashion designers. A design will gain value only after the commercial success, yet this success can result in the loss of copyright protection.

Another issue which concerns the current framework tends to benefit large fashion brand more than a independent designers. The established fashion houses have the general resources and legal knowledge to register their design under the design act. The start up fashion business and small designers may lack awareness or shortage of financial resources to obtain the protection. As a result, they become more vulnerable to design piracy.

The judicial decisions such as Ritika private limited v Biba apparels private limited states that Indian court have applied section 15 according to its legislative goal. However, these cases also reveal the difficulties faced by the designers when the artistic creation enter the mass production. the difference between copyright and design protection may not always reflect the realities of the modern fashion industry.

Such as United Kingdom and the European union suggests that the broader design protection mechanism can provide greater support to creators. While in India it seeks to encourage competition and prevent domination the existing framework may not protect the original fashion designs from copying.

In my opinion, the section 15 continues to serve an important legal purpose, but its application in the fashion industry requires reconsideration. The fashion industry today is very different from when the provision was originally enacted. Social media, fast fashion and online marketplaces have made copying easier and faster, making stronger protection increasingly important for designers

6. CONCLUSION

The fashion industry depends on creativity and originality, making the intellectual property protection essential for fashion brands and designers.in this article mainly examined the role of section 15 of the copyright act,1957 in regulating the relation between design protection and copyright protection in India. This analysis shows that the provision was mainly introduced to prevent overlapping intellectual property rights, this application in the fashion industry has created certain practical challenges

This study found that the 50-copy rule may result in losing the copyright protection for designers when their creation enter largest scale commercial protection through this analysis of relevant legal provision and judicial decisions it become more evident that the current legal framework often struggles to balance the interest of market competition and creators so as a result the concern regarding the adequacy of protection available to the fashion designers are still exist

Over all the section 15 serves an important legal purpose, but its effectiveness in the modern fashion industry remains open to debate. The present legal framework requires certain improvement to ensure that the fashion designer’s do not lose protection simply because their designs achieve commercial success

7   REFERENCES

1. The copyright Act,1957(India)
2. The designs act, 2000(India)
3. Ritik private limited v Biba apparel private limited, 2016
4. Microfibres Inc v Girdhar & co,2009
5. NLUA journal of integrated research in law, significance of intellectual property rights in the fashion industry, volume IV, issue II.
6. WIPO magazine, the role of Ip rights in the fashion business: A US perspective