Skip to content

CS Professional · Intellectual Property Rights - Law and Practice · Business Concerns in Commercializing Intellectual Property Rights

Kiran Prints, a bookseller, buys 500 copies of a guidebook from a wholesaler. Copyright owner Lexis House proves the copies are infringing copies and sues to recover possession and claim conversion damages. Kiran proves it had reasonable grounds to believe the copies did not infringe any copyright. Under the Copyright Act, 1957, which statement is correct?

Lexis House can still recover possession of the infringing copies, which are deemed its property, but it gets no remedy for conversion. Under the proviso to section 58 of the Copyright Act, 1957, the opponent escapes conversion liability by proving reasonable grounds for believing the copies were not infringing.

  1. ALexis House may recover possession of the infringing copies, but is not entitled to a remedy for their conversionCorrect
  2. BLexis House may claim neither possession nor conversion, as the copies were bought in good faith
  3. CLexis House may claim conversion, because good faith is irrelevant to civil remedies
  4. DLexis House loses ownership of the copies since they were sold in the market

Explanation

Under section 58, infringing copies are deemed the property of the copyright owner, who may sue to recover possession or for conversion. The proviso denies a remedy for conversion only if the opponent proves lack of awareness of subsistence of copyright or reasonable grounds for believing the copies were not infringing. Kiran proves the latter, so conversion fails, but the deemed ownership and recovery of possession remain.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Business Concerns in Commercializing Intellectual Property Rights shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

More Business Concerns in Commercializing Intellectual Property Rights questions