KSLU Solved Question Papers
Intellectual Property Rights II
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 10
2014 Jun Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 10 Intellectual Property Rights II 2014 Jun Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2014 Jun examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2014 Jun examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2014 Jun examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 20 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1
Unit I
(a)"Copyright exists in expression of idea and not in idea" - Explain this statement in the light of various subject matters of copyright.[15]
Answer
For full marks, cover: the statement and its meaning (the idea and expression dichotomy); its justification (the free flow of ideas, the division of labour with patent law, the long copyright term); its legal basis (TRIPS article 9(2), WCT article 2; sections 13, 2(h), 13(5), 14 of the Copyright Act, 1957); where the line falls, with the courts' tests (form, manner and arrangement; the ordinary observer; substantial similarity); the statement applied to every subject matter, each with a case: literary works and compilations (Eastern Book Company, Burlington, Feist), drama and television formats (R.G. Anand, Zee Telefilms, Barbara Taylor Bradford, Anil Gupta), music, art, films (Leo Burnett, MRF), sound recordings, computer programmes, techniques and titles (Institute for Inner Studies, Krishika Lulla); the doctrines at the edge (merger, stock scenes, facts); the critique; the conclusion.
The statement and its meaning
The statement expresses the most basic limit on copyright: the law protects how something is said, drawn, composed or filmed, not what is said. The underlying idea, theme, plot, fact, method or concept is free for anyone to use. What is protected is the particular form of expression the author chose. This is the idea and expression dichotomy.
An example makes the line clear. The idea of a story about two lovers from feuding families is free; anyone may write one. But no one may copy the words, characters, scenes and sequence of a particular novel built on that idea.
Why the law draws the line
- Ideas are the raw material of all creation. If the first person to have an idea could stop everyone else from using it, culture, education and science would stall.
- Patents, not copyright, protect technical ideas. A patent is granted only after examination for novelty and inventive step, and lasts twenty years. Copyright arises automatically and lasts the author's life plus sixty years. It must not become a back door to a monopoly over ideas without those checks.
- Expression is what the author really contributes. Many people may share an idea; the particular way one person expresses it is his own labour and skill.
The legal basis
- International law. Article 9(2) of the TRIPS Agreement says copyright protection "shall extend to expressions and not to ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such". Article 2 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty, 1996 is to the same effect.
- The Copyright Act, 1957. The Act has no single clause stating the rule, but it runs through the scheme.
In the Act.
- Copyright subsists in original works (section 13(1)), and originality is judged on the expression.
- A dramatic work's acting form must be fixed in writing or otherwise (section 2(h)).
- In architecture, only the artistic character and design are protected, not methods of construction (section 13(5)).
- The owner's rights in section 14 are rights to reproduce, perform or adapt the work, not to control its ideas.
Where the line falls: the courts' tests
- Protection extends to the form, manner and arrangement of the expression, not to the idea or theme.
- Where the same idea is developed independently, similarities are bound to arise. The question is whether they go to the fundamental or substantial aspects of expression.
- The decisive test is whether an ordinary observer, after seeing both works, gets the unmistakable impression that one is a copy of the other.
R.G. Anand v. Delux Films, AIR 1978 SC 1613. The playwright of Hum Hindustani said the film New Delhi copied his play. Both dealt with provincialism and a marriage across regional lines.
Held. There is no copyright in an idea, subject matter, theme, plot or historical fact. The film developed the common theme in its own way, so there was no infringement. The Supreme Court's propositions remain the starting point for every case.
The statement applied to each subject matter
1. Literary works and compilations. The words, structure and selection of a book are protected; its facts and themes are not. In a compilation, only the selection and arrangement are protected, and only if they show skill and judgment.
Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak, AIR 2008 SC 809. A publisher claimed copyright in its edited Supreme Court judgments.
Held. The text of the judgments was free. The editor's paragraph numbering, cross-references and notes, which required skill and judgment, were protected expression.
Burlington Home Shopping Pvt. Ltd. v. Rajnish Chibber, 61 (1995) DLT 6. A mail-order firm's customer list was taken by a former employee.
Held. The compilation, built with labour and skill, was a literary work, and its arrangement was copied. The names and addresses as facts were not monopolised; the compiled database was.
Feist Publications Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 18 USPQ 2d 1275 (US Supreme Court, 1991). A rival copied the alphabetical white pages of a telephone directory.
Held. Facts are never original, and an obvious alphabetical arrangement shows no creativity. Copying them was not infringement.
2. Dramatic works and television formats. A play's scenes, dialogue and sequence are protected; its premise is not. But an idea worked out in detail can become protected expression.
Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Sundial Communications Pvt. Ltd., 2003 (27) PTC 457 (Bom). A producer gave Zee detailed concept notes, character sketches and scripts for a series. Zee then made a strikingly similar one.
Held. The notes were an original literary work. Zee took their form and arrangement, not merely the idea, and also breached confidence.
Barbara Taylor Bradford v. Sahara Media Entertainment Ltd., 2004 (28) PTC 474 (Cal). A novelist sought to stop a serial with a similar rags-to-riches story.
Held. A broad plot is an idea. With no substantial similarity of expression shown, the telecast was allowed.
Anil Gupta v. Kunal Dasgupta, AIR 2002 Del 379. The plaintiff disclosed in confidence a concept for a matchmaking reality show, which the defendants then announced.
Held. A bare idea has no copyright. But an idea developed into a concept fit for use can be protected by the law of confidence. The defendants were restrained for a limited period.
3. Musical works. A specific melody is protected; a scale, raga, rhythm or genre is free.
4. Artistic works. A particular painting or photograph is protected. Its subject, such as a monument or a landscape, remains free for others to depict in their own way.
5. Cinematograph films. The recording itself is protected. Whether a new film that tells a similar story infringes depends on how much expression it takes.
Star India Pvt. Ltd. v. Leo Burnett (India) Pvt. Ltd., 2003 (27) PTC 81 (Bom). An advertisement was said to imitate a serial's scenes.
Held. A film is infringed only by a copy of the film itself, not by another film that resembles it.
MRF Ltd. v. Metro Tyres Ltd., (2019) 262 DLT 734. A tyre maker alleged that a rival's commercial copied its own.
Held. The Delhi High Court differed from Leo Burnett: a film may be infringed by another that is substantially and materially similar. But on the facts, the shared ideas of a robotic arm and a red motorbike did not amount to copying of expression.
6. Sound recordings. The recorded sounds are protected. A new recording of the same song, made with permission or under a statutory licence, is a separate recording.
7. Computer programmes. The code is protected as a literary work. Its function, algorithm as an idea, and methods of operation are free (TRIPS articles 9(2) and 10(1)).
8. Techniques and titles. Methods and titles are ideas or short phrases, not works.
Institute for Inner Studies v. Charlotte Anderson, Delhi High Court, 10 January 2014. Copyright was claimed in the asanas and techniques of a healing system.
Held. The written literature was protected, but not the techniques, which others were free to teach and practise.
Krishika Lulla v. Shyam Vithalrao Devkatta, Supreme Court, 15 October 2015. A writer claimed copyright in the title of his synopsis.
Held. A title alone is not a work, so no copyright subsisted in it.
The doctrines at the edge
- Merger. Where an idea can be expressed in only one or very few ways, the expression merges with the idea and is not protected.
- Stock scenes. Incidents that naturally follow from a theme, such as a chase in a thriller or a wedding in a family drama, are free.
- Facts and history. Historical events and news are free; only the author's treatment of them is protected.
A critique
The line is easy to state but hard to draw. The more abstractly one describes a work, the more it looks like an idea. The more concretely, the more it looks like expression. Courts therefore decide case by case, which gives flexibility but little certainty. The rule also leaves valuable concepts, such as television formats, largely to the law of confidence.
Conclusion. The statement correctly describes the reach of copyright. Ideas, themes, facts, methods and titles are free, while their particular expression in a book, play, song, painting, film, recording or programme is protected. The courts apply the line through the tests in R.G. Anand: expression must be substantially copied, as an ordinary observer would see it. Zee Telefilms and Anil Gupta show that a developed concept may still be protected, by copyright or by confidence.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 10 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.