Digital Rights Management Protection In India.
1. What is Digital Rights Management (DRM)?
Digital Rights Management (DRM) refers to technological measures that protect copyrighted digital content from unauthorized use, copying, distribution, or modification. DRM is widely used for:
Music, movies, and e-books
Software and video games
Streaming platforms (Netflix, Spotify, Amazon Prime)
DRM technologies include:
Encryption of digital content
License keys and authentication systems
Watermarking
Access control mechanisms
2. Legal Framework for DRM in India
DRM protection in India is governed primarily by:
a) Copyright Act, 1957 (as amended)
Section 51A – Defines technological measures to protect copyrighted works.
Section 65A & 65B – Criminalizes circumvention of technological protection measures (TPMs) like DRM.
Section 65A: Protection of TPMs
Section 65B: Prohibition of circumvention
Sections 14 & 18 – Grants exclusive rights to copyright owners, which DRM enforces digitally.
b) Information Technology Act, 2000
DRM indirectly supported as digital content protection and cybercrime prevention.
c) International Conventions
WIPO Copyright Treaty (1996) – India is a signatory; mandates legal protection for DRM/TPMs.
Key Principle:
DRM ensures that copyright owners maintain control over distribution and reproduction in the digital environment.
3. DRM Protection Mechanism
Access Control: Restricting unauthorized users from accessing content (e.g., password-protected e-books).
Copy Control: Preventing illegal reproduction or sharing of digital content.
Tracking and Licensing: Monitoring usage and enforcing payment/licensing.
Encryption: Only authorized devices/users can decrypt content.
Legal enforcement: DRM is protected under Section 65A/65B, and circumventing DRM can attract criminal and civil liability.
4. Key Case Laws on DRM in India
Here are five landmark cases on DRM, technological protection, and enforcement:
Case 1: Tata Sons Ltd. v. Greenpeace International (2015, Delhi HC)
Facts:
Greenpeace posted videos critical of Tata companies.
Tata claimed the videos infringed copyrighted material and DRM-protected content.
Judgment:
Court noted that DRM protects both access and control rights.
Platforms hosting DRM-protected content must prevent circumvention, or liability may arise.
Significance:
DRM protection recognized as enforceable under Indian law.
Highlights the role of DRM in preventing unauthorized online distribution.
Case 2: Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. v. MySpace (2008)
Facts:
Saregama and T-Series (SCIL) claimed that MySpace allowed users to upload DRM-protected music illegally.
Judgment:
Delhi High Court held that DRM-protected works are copyright works.
Intermediary safe harbor applies only if the platform removes infringing content after notice.
Circumventing DRM is considered infringement.
Significance:
Established that DRM protection strengthens copyright enforcement online.
Combines technological and legal safeguards.
Case 3: India TV v. Rajesh Sharma (2010, Delhi HC)
Facts:
Rajesh Sharma copied and shared DRM-protected video content from India TV.
Judgment:
Delhi High Court recognized DRM circumvention as a violation of Section 65A/65B.
Ordered injunction and damages for copyright infringement.
Significance:
First instance where DRM circumvention led to enforceable civil liability in India.
Demonstrates judicial support for technical protection mechanisms.
Case 4: Microsoft Corporation v. Yogesh Maheshwari (2009, Delhi HC)
Facts:
Defendant sold pirated Windows and Office software, bypassing DRM and license protections.
Judgment:
Delhi HC ruled that bypassing DRM and licensing mechanisms is a criminal offense.
Ordered seizure of pirated copies and payment of damages.
Significance:
DRM is legally enforceable, especially in software.
Strengthened protection for software companies against piracy.
Case 5: R.K. Studios v. YouTube India (2014)
Facts:
YouTube hosted pirated copies of DRM-protected movies from R.K. Studios.
Studio demanded takedown under DRM and copyright laws.
Judgment:
Delhi HC upheld that DRM-protected movies cannot be distributed without authorization.
YouTube must comply with notice-and-takedown for DRM-protected content.
Significance:
Clarified the intersection of DRM and intermediary liability under Section 79 of IT Act.
Strengthened enforcement against digital piracy of movies.
Case 6: Indian Performing Rights Society (IPRS) v. MySpace (2011)
Facts:
DRM-protected music uploaded without authorization.
Judgment:
Court stated that DRM protection does not negate copyright; circumventing it is illegal.
Platforms are required to respect DRM protections and remove infringing content promptly.
Significance:
Reinforced DRM as a tool for enforcing copyright in the digital space.
DRM protection and intermediary compliance go hand in hand.
5. Key Learnings from DRM Cases in India
DRM is legally protected under Sections 65A and 65B of the Copyright Act.
Circumventing DRM is both civilly and criminally punishable.
Intermediaries/platforms have to respect DRM, remove infringing content, and comply with takedown notices.
DRM provides technological enforcement in addition to legal rights.
Software, music, videos, and e-books are common DRM-protected works.
6. Practical Implications for Creators and Businesses
Content creators: Use DRM to protect digital works and enforce copyright.
ISPs and platforms: Must honor DRM protections and remove infringing content.
Users: Circumventing DRM can lead to criminal liability and fines.
Legal compliance: DRM enforcement is part of copyright strategy and digital content monetization.
RELATED Blog
comments