https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176133 Copyright in reported Supreme Court judgments was confined to original editorial expression and did not extend to the underlying judgment text, which remains available as a government work and cannot be monopolised through ordinary copy-editing. The Court held that corrections, citations, formatting and other mechanical revisions in the SCC version lacked the minimal creativity needed for protection, but recognised copyright in genuinely original editorial material, including headnotes, footnotes, editorial notes, paragraph numbering, internal references and the presentation of concurring or dissenting opinions, because these involved independent skill, judgment and selection. Protection was therefore denied for the reported text itself but granted for the original editorial features. en-us Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Dec 2015 14:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176133 Copyright in reported Supreme Court judgments was confined to original editorial expression and did not extend to the underlying judgment text, which remains available as a government work and cannot be monopolised through ordinary copy-editing. The Court held that corrections, citations, formatting and other mechanical revisions in the SCC version lacked the minimal creativity needed for protection, but recognised copyright in genuinely original editorial material, including headnotes, footnotes, editorial notes, paragraph numbering, internal references and the presentation of concurring or dissenting opinions, because these involved independent skill, judgment and selection. Protection was therefore denied for the reported text itself but granted for the original editorial features. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176133