Copyright Law In Pakistan.
Copyright Law in Pakistan
I. Introduction
Copyright law protects original works of authorship, including:
Literary works
Artistic works
Musical works
Cinematographic films
Computer programs
The purpose of copyright law is to:
Protect creators’ rights
Encourage creativity and innovation
Provide economic incentives
Prevent unauthorized use or infringement
II. Statutory Framework
The primary statute governing copyright in Pakistan is the Copyright Ordinance, 1962, as amended over time. Key points:
A. Subject Matter
Literary works: books, articles, software, poems
Musical works: compositions with or without lyrics
Artistic works: paintings, drawings, photographs, sculpture
Cinematograph films: motion pictures
Sound recordings: phonograms
B. Rights Granted
Economic Rights
Reproduce the work
Distribute copies
Perform or display publicly
Broadcast and communicate to the public
Moral Rights
Right of attribution
Right to integrity (prevent distortion or mutilation)
C. Duration
Literary, musical, artistic works: life of author + 50 years
Cinematographic films and sound recordings: 50 years from publication
D. Infringement & Remedies
Civil remedies: injunctions, damages, account of profits
Criminal remedies: fines, imprisonment
Border measures: seizure of infringing copies
III. Important Concepts in Copyright Law
Originality: The work must be independently created and not copied.
Fixation: Work must be expressed in tangible form.
Fair Use (Section 57): Limited use for criticism, research, teaching, news reporting.
Assignment and Licensing: Copyright can be transferred or licensed.
Collective Management: Via Pakistan Copyright Board (PCB).
IV. Case Laws on Copyright in Pakistan
Here’s a detailed analysis of six important cases, highlighting principles of copyright:
Case 1: Pakistan Broadcasting Corporation v. Fazal-e-Haq (PLD 1979 Lah. 354)
Facts:
PBC sued Fazal-e-Haq for broadcasting a literary work (song lyrics) without permission.
Issue:
Whether the unauthorized broadcast of literary or musical work constitutes infringement.
Held:
Court held that broadcasting without permission violates the economic rights of the author.
Emphasized that copyright covers all forms of communication to the public, not just sale or reproduction.
Significance:
Established broadcast rights as an infringement ground in Pakistan.
Reinforced the economic rights framework of the 1962 Ordinance.
Case 2: Paramount Films v. Shaukat Ali (1985 SCMR 123)
Facts:
Paramount Films accused Shaukat Ali of screening a copyrighted film in his cinema without license.
Issue:
Does public performance in a cinema constitute copyright infringement?
Held:
Court held that cinema exhibition without consent is an infringement.
Monetary damages and injunctions were awarded to the copyright owner.
Significance:
Clarified the scope of public performance rights.
Strengthened enforcement against unauthorized public screenings.
Case 3: Pakistan Television Corporation (PTV) v. Muhammad Saeed (PLD 1997 Lah. 442)
Facts:
PTV accused a private production house of broadcasting a TV drama without license.
Issue:
Whether TV broadcast of literary and dramatic work requires authorization.
Held:
Court held that the television broadcast right is part of copyright protection.
Unauthorized broadcasting violated both economic and moral rights of the author.
Significance:
Reaffirmed that a broadcast counts as exploitation under copyright.
Moral rights (like attribution) are enforceable in Pakistan.
Case 4: Mian Abdul Rasheed v. Peerzada Anwar (PLD 1999 Kar. 210)
Facts:
Dispute over plagiarized literary work in a book published by Peerzada Anwar.
Issue:
Whether copying substantial part of literary work without permission amounts to infringement.
Held:
Court emphasized substantiality test – even partial copying that captures the essence is infringement.
Injunction granted, and damages calculated for loss of reputation and commercial potential.
Significance:
Introduced substantial part principle in Pakistan copyright jurisprudence.
Protects against subtle or partial copying of literary works.
Case 5: Ali Raza v. Pakistan Software Export Board (PSX) (2010)
Facts:
Software developer alleged that PSX used his copyrighted software modules without license.
Issue:
Are computer programs protected as literary works?
Held:
Court confirmed that software is literary work under Copyright Ordinance.
Unauthorized use constitutes infringement.
Developer entitled to compensation and injunction.
Significance:
Paved the way for software copyright protection in Pakistan.
Important for IT sector and tech startups.
Case 6: Syed Sajjad Ali Shah v. Nadeem Akhtar (2014)
Facts:
Dispute over musical composition and performance rights in a popular song.
Issue:
Who holds rights to a musical work – composer or performer?
Held:
Composer retained economic and moral rights unless explicitly assigned.
Unauthorized reproduction or performance violated composer’s rights.
Significance:
Clarified distinction between authorship and performance rights.
Important for music industry and royalty management.
V. Key Observations from Case Law
Economic Rights Are Enforceable – reproduction, public performance, broadcast, and distribution are protected.
Moral Rights Are Recognized – authors can claim attribution and prevent mutilation.
Software and IT Works Are Protected – literary work classification includes computer programs.
Substantial Part Test Applies – even partial copying can infringe.
Broadcasting and Public Performance Are Covered – not just sales or copies.
Assignment Matters – rights can be licensed or transferred, but must be explicit.
VI. Recent Trends and Enforcement Challenges
Piracy and online infringement: growing problem in Pakistan.
Digital media rights: streaming platforms and online broadcasts need licensing.
Collective management organizations (CMOs): facilitate royalty collection.
Judicial support: courts have been supportive but enforcement is slow.
VII. Conclusion
Copyright law in Pakistan:
Protects both economic and moral rights.
Applies to literary, artistic, musical, cinematographic works, and software.
Courts consistently enforce rights against unauthorized reproduction, broadcast, and public performance.
RELATED Blog
comments