https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458311 Delhi HC interpreted Section 52(1)(i) of the Copyright Act broadly to cover reproduction by a teacher or pupil in the course of instruction, including photocopied course packs prepared for academic use. The Court stated that no implied quantitative or qualitative ceiling can be read into that clause and rejected importing the fair dealing limits of Section 52(1)(a) or the separate subject-matter of Section 52(1)(h) into it. It also treated photocopying through a university-licensed service as not changing the character of the educational use, while recognising unresolved factual questions on the extent of copying and whether entire books were reproduced. en-us Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Oct 2024 22:02:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458311 Delhi HC interpreted Section 52(1)(i) of the Copyright Act broadly to cover reproduction by a teacher or pupil in the course of instruction, including photocopied course packs prepared for academic use. The Court stated that no implied quantitative or qualitative ceiling can be read into that clause and rejected importing the fair dealing limits of Section 52(1)(a) or the separate subject-matter of Section 52(1)(h) into it. It also treated photocopying through a university-licensed service as not changing the character of the educational use, while recognising unresolved factual questions on the extent of copying and whether entire books were reproduced. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458311