This case addresses a copyright infringement dispute concerning the reproduction and publication of ICSE Class-X question papers. The central issue is whether the defendant's publication of a guidebook containing verbatim question papers with answers infringes upon the plaintiff's copyright.
Background:
The plaintiff, Evergreen Publications (India) Ltd., acquired exclusive copyright in ICSE Class-X question papers for the years 2015, 2016, and 2017 for ₹1.35 crores. The defendant, Ravinder Singh & Sons, published a guidebook containing identical question papers with answers. This led to the filing of a suit by the plaintiff seeking an interim injunction against the defendant for alleged copyright infringement.

Case Analysis

Brief Facts of the Case:

• The plaintiff acquired exclusive rights to the question papers under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the ICSE Board.
• The defendant's guidebook reproduced the question papers verbatim, including punctuation, without adding original content or additional modules.
• The plaintiff sought an interim injunction to restrain the defendant from printing, publishing, or selling the infringing guidebook.
• The trial court granted the injunction, prompting the defendant to appeal.

Issues Raised:

• Whether the reproduction of question papers in the defendant's guidebook constitutes copyright infringement.
• Whether question papers qualify as "original literary works" under the Copyright Act, 1957.
• Whether the defendant's work is transformative and falls under "fair use."

Plaintiff's Submissions:

• The question papers are original literary works protected under the Copyright Act, 1957.
• The defendant's verbatim reproduction of question papers, without adding original or creative content, infringes the plaintiff's copyright.
• Reliance was placed on Rupender Kashyap v. Jiwan Publishing, which held that publishing answer books using copyrighted question papers amounts to infringement.

Defendant's Submissions:

• The guidebook serves an educational purpose, providing answers to the questions for the benefit of students.
• The reproduction falls under "fair use" as it aims to assist weaker students in understanding the questions.
• Cited Syndicate of the Press of the University of Cambridge Vs. B.D. Bhandari to argue that providing answers to questions in textbooks does not amount to infringement.

Judgments Referred:

• Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak (AIR 2008 SC 809): Established that copyright protects original works created with skill, judgment, and labor.
• Syndicate of the Press of the University of Cambridge v. B.D. Bhandari (2011 (47) PTC 244 (Del.)): Held that derivative works, such as guidebooks, must add transformative value to avoid infringement.
• Rupender Kashyap Vs. Jiwan Publishing: Reiterated that reproducing question papers in answer books constitutes infringement.
• Ladbroke (Football) Ltd. v. William Hill (Football) Ltd. ([1964] 1 All ER 465): Affirmed that compilations demonstrating skill, judgment, and labor are protected under copyright law.

Reasoning of the Judge:

• Originality of Question Papers: The court recognized question papers as original literary works, given the skill, labor, and creativity involved in their preparation.
• Infringement: The defendant's guidebook replicated the question papers verbatim, without adding transformative value or originality, constituting infringement.
• Fair Use Doctrine: The defendant failed to establish that the guidebook was transformative or served a purpose distinct from the original work.
• Public Authority: The ICSE Board, discharging public functions, granted exclusive copyright to the plaintiff, reinforcing the protection of the question papers.

Decision:

The appeal was dismissed, and the interim injunction against the defendant was upheld. The defendant was restrained from printing, publishing, or selling the infringing guidebook.
Concluding Note:
This case reinforces the protection of copyrighted works under the Copyright Act, 1957, emphasizing that even question papers qualify as original literary works. It underscores the importance of originality and the transformative nature of derivative works to avoid infringement. The judgment also highlights the judiciary's commitment to preserving the integrity of intellectual property rights.

Case Title: Ravinder Singh & Sons Vs. Evergreen Publications (India) Ltd. & Anr.
Date of Order: January 10, 2018
Case Number: FAO 235/2017
Neutral Citation: 2018 DHC 269
Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Najmi Waziri

Disclaimer:
The information shared here is intended to serve the public interest by offering insights and perspectives. However, readers are advised to exercise their own discretion when interpreting and applying this information. The content herein is subjective and may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation.

Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor - Patent and Trademark Attorney
Email: ajayamitabhsuman@gmail.com, Ph no: 9990389539