Skip to content

CS Professional · Intellectual Property Rights - Law and Practice · Copyrights

In a suit, Anand Arts produces a certified, sealed extract of the Register of Copyrights showing him as owner of a painting. The defendant claims the extract is worthless without the original register. What is the legal position under the Act?

The certified, sealed extract is admissible in all courts without further proof or production of the original, and the Register is prima facie evidence of the particulars. It is rebuttable, not conclusive, so the defendant's objection fails but ownership can still be challenged.

  1. AThe extract is inadmissible unless the original register is produced
  2. BThe extract is conclusive proof of ownership and cannot be challenged
  3. CThe extract is admissible in all courts without further proof or production of the original, and is prima facie evidence of the particularsCorrect
  4. DThe extract is admissible only before the Registrar and not in courts

Explanation

Section 48 makes the Register prima facie evidence of particulars entered, and certified copies sealed with the Copyright Office seal are admissible in all courts without further proof or the original. Prima facie evidence is rebuttable, so it is not conclusive; the defendant may seek rectification under Section 50.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Copyrights shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise CopyrightsFree diagnostic mock

More Copyrights questions