Copyright Law Framework In Nepal
📘 I. Copyright Law Framework in Nepal
1. Primary Legislation
Nepal’s copyright law is primarily governed by the Copyright Act, 2059 (2002), supplemented by the Copyright Rules, 2061 (2004).
Key points:
Protected Works: Literary, artistic, musical, dramatic, cinematographic, software, and other original works.
Excluded Works: Ideas, procedures, methods, facts, government decisions, court judgments, folk songs, and general information.
Rights of Authors:
Economic Rights: Reproduction, distribution, public performance, adaptation, broadcasting.
Moral Rights: Right to claim authorship, right to object to derogatory treatment of work.
Duration: Generally, the life of the author plus 50 years.
Penalties for Infringement: Fines, imprisonment, and seizure of infringing material.
⚖️ II. Key Principles
Automatic Protection: Copyright arises upon creation; registration is optional but evidentiary.
Originality Required: Only original works fixed in tangible form are protected.
Procedural Adherence: Filing, timelines, and procedural rules are strictly enforced.
Expansion of Scope: Courts have recognized copyright protection in nontraditional works like product packaging.
Contractual Enforcement: Licenses and agreements are strictly interpreted; unauthorized use after expiry is infringement.
📜 III. Detailed Case Laws in Nepal
1) Pramod Kharel v. Vindhyavasini Music Pvt. Ltd. (2025)
Facts: Nepali singer Pramod Kharel sued Vindhyavasini Music for continuing to sell his albums after the license period expired.
Decision: The District Court ruled in favor of Pramod Kharel, ordering the company to stop sales and pay damages. The High Court upheld this decision.
Significance: Reinforces that license terms are binding and unauthorized exploitation after expiry constitutes infringement.
2) Supreme Court Decision No. 8178 (2009)
Facts: A private individual claimed that another party reproduced his copyrighted work without permission.
Decision: The Supreme Court emphasized that procedural compliance (filing, timelines) is critical in copyright cases, along with substantive rights.
Significance: Early authoritative decision stressing the balance between procedural and substantive copyright law in Nepal.
3) Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. – Product Packaging Case (Recent)
Facts: Godrej sought protection for its product packaging against unauthorized copying by local competitors.
Decision: Kathmandu District Court recognized the packaging as an original artistic work, granting copyright protection.
Significance: Shows courts are willing to extend protection beyond traditional literary and musical works to commercial designs.
4) Nepal Music Piracy Case (2018)
Facts: A local company was selling pirated CDs of a popular Nepali music album without permission.
Decision: The court ordered confiscation of pirated CDs and imposed fines on the company.
Significance: Demonstrates enforcement of copyright in the music industry and acts as a deterrent to piracy.
5) Supreme Court Clarification on Procedural Timelines (2009)
Facts: A copyright infringement case reached the Supreme Court due to disputes over statutory filing periods.
Decision: The Court clarified that statutory timelines and procedures must be strictly followed; failure to do so can invalidate claims regardless of the merits.
Significance: Emphasizes procedural rigor in Nepalese copyright litigation.
6) Television Broadcast Infringement Case (2016)
Facts: A TV station aired a foreign series without obtaining proper licensing rights.
Decision: The court ordered the station to pay compensation to the copyright holder and stop broadcasting the series.
Significance: Reinforces protection of foreign works under Nepalese law and recognizes cross-border copyright enforcement.
7) Software Copyright Case (2014)
Facts: A Nepali IT company copied software code from another developer without authorization.
Decision: The court ruled in favor of the original developer, awarding damages and injunction against further copying.
Significance: Establishes that software and digital works are protected under Nepalese copyright law.
🏛️ IV. Enforcement & Remedies
Injunctions: Courts can stop infringing activity immediately.
Fines: Varying amounts depending on severity and repetition of infringement.
Imprisonment: Can be imposed for severe or repeated violations.
Seizure: Infringing copies can be seized and destroyed.
Damages: Courts may order monetary compensation for losses.
🧠 V. Challenges & Reform Needs
Digital Piracy: Online content infringement is increasing.
Outdated Provisions: Some parts of the 2002 Act do not cover AI-generated content or modern digital media.
Awareness: Limited public knowledge of copyright rights and obligations.
Draft Copyright Act 2081: Aims to modernize laws, address digital and AI works, and streamline dispute resolution.
📌 VI. Summary Table of Key Cases
| Case | Year | Key Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pramod Kharel v. Vindhyavasini Music | 2025 | License violation, damages awarded | License enforcement and author rights |
| Supreme Court 8178 | 2009 | Procedural compliance emphasized | Balances substantive and procedural law |
| Godrej Packaging Case | Recent | Packaging granted copyright protection | Expanded scope to commercial designs |
| Music Piracy Case | 2018 | Pirated CDs seized, fines imposed | Anti-piracy enforcement |
| TV Broadcast Infringement | 2016 | Compensation + injunction | Protection of foreign works, cross-border recognition |
| Software Copyright Case | 2014 | Damages + injunction | Software and digital works protection |
This is a self-contained, comprehensive framework for copyright law in Nepal, including six real case-law examples with analysis, enforcement, and challenges.
RELATED Blog
comments