Template talk:PD-India

The link to the Indian copyright law does not work anymore. Is there another webpage we could link to? Also: Is it possible that images that are in the public domain in India might still be protected in other contries? If that is the case, a warning should be added to the template (see {{PD-US}} for an example. --Matt314 22:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Please update the year

This template should be updated to "as of 2007, prior to 1 January 1947" (or whatever date format). Could somebody fix this? Valentinian ^(talk) 21:01, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This template should be updated to "as of 2008, prior to 1 January 1948". Could somebody fix this? Thanks Ww2censor 05:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, (ie. as of 2007, prior to 1-January-1947) should be changed to (before 1 January {{ #expr: {{CURRENTYEAR}} - 60 }}) which comes out (before 1 January 1964). —Gabbe (talk) 00:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

 Done [1] —Giggy 02:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Change the URL

This URL doesn't exist. It is necessary to change the address.

Example)

http://www.naukri.com/lls/copyright/section5.htm#25 The Indian Copyright Act, 1957

　　　　　↓

http://copyright.gov.in/handbook.htm The Indian Copyright Act, 1957

changed not to the handbook but to the actual law. --Matt314 22:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit request

Request to admin: Please check [2]. The change requested is listed below,

"The template PD-India template as it stands is incorrect. Under the S. 13(2) of the Copyright Act, the relevant criteria are that:

• The work was first published in India, or
• If the work was first published outside India, the author was a citizen of India when the work was made.

The first sentence should, therefore, read:

This image was created by an Indian citizen or was first published in India, and is now in the public domain in India because its term of copyright has expired.

The phrase "is in the public domain in India" is important, because the photograph may continue to be protected by copyright in some countries. A full statement, like in Template:PD-US would be better.

I do not have editing rights for the template. Could someone who does please make the change. -- Lexmercatoria 13:41, 9 June 2007 (UTC)".

Regards, Ganeshk 15:59, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

 Done better that way? Michelet-密是力 05:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Correction: "The Indian Copyright act applies in India, to work first published in India." If the work is published outside India, the indian copyright act will be relevant only if the publication country is not a member of the Berne convention, or the world trade organization, which will be <1% of the time. Otherwise, even an Indian citizen can ask for the Berne convention protection in his own country. Michelet-密是力 05:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

More precise specification of law

Please specify that the relevant clause is Indian Copyright Act (1957), Chapter V Section 25.

25. Term of copyright in photographs.-In the case of a photograph, copyright shall subsist until [sixty] years from the beginning of the calendar year next following the year in which the photograph is published.

Thank you. Alastair Haines (talk) 15:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. Yann (talk) 12:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

This template needs work

{{editprotected}} There are drawings marked with this template. Therefore, this template needs to fully reflect Indian law for works other than photographs. Here is what it needs to say. Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations: 60 years from date of publication. Posthumous works (other than those above): 60 years from publication date (note this can extend copyright by many years!) Any other kind of work: Author's death plus 60 years. Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright. -Nard the Bard 15:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Your proposition of modification looks good to me. Yann (talk) 19:19, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Please recheck the wording and re-add {{editprotected}} if any changes are necessary. --Waldir ^talk 13:36, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Clarification

{{Editprotected}}

This template currently says, "Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright." This is not entirely accurate. While copyright rules of 1957, section 52(q) excludes as copyright violations the "reproduction or publication" of certain government works, they explicitly require the retention of certain materials in subsection (ii). Reproduction in the absence of these materials is regarded as a copyright violation.

Specifically, it says that the following are not copyright violations: "(q) the reproduction or publication of-

(i) any matter which has been published in any Official Gazette except an Act of a Legislature;

(ii) any Act of a Legislature subject to the condition that such Act is reproduced or published together with any commentary thereon or any other original matter;
(iii) the report of any committee, commission, council, board or other like body appointed by the Government if such report has been laid on the Table of the Legislature, unless the reproduction or publication of such report is prohibited by the Government;
(iv) any judgement or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority, unless the reproduction or publication of such judgment or order is prohibited by the court, the tribunal or other judicial authority,

as the case may be;

With respect to Acts of Legislature, it even forbids translations in any Indian language if the Government of India is offering one for sale, unless published with disclaimer:

(r) the production or publication of a translation in any Indian language of an Act of a Legislature and of any rules or orders made thereunder-
(i) if no translation of such Act or rules or orders in that language has previously been produced or published by the Government; or
(ii) where a translation of such Act or rules or orders in that language has been produced or published by the Government, if the translation is not available for sale to the public: Provided that such translation contains a statement at a prominent place to the effect that the

translation has not been authorised or accepted as authentic by the Government;

(See page 35 of that pdf.)

Acts of Legislature are the primary sticking point, but note, too, that the law suggests that copyright protection does exist when a court, tribunal or judicial authority has forbidden reproduction of reports and judgements" Literally, the "unless" clauses in (q)(iii) and (iv) nullify the header: "52. Certain acts not to be infringement of copyright. -(1) The following acts shall not constitute an infringement of copyright..."

I believe it may be prudent to at least alter "are" to read "may be." I'm concerned that we could inadvertently mislead somebody here. To be on the safe side, I'd really suggest altering "Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright" to "Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports may be free from copyright protection under certain circumstances. (Chapter 25 (q)(r))" and letting Wikimedia's visitors determine for themselves if copyright is a concern in their intended usage. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:31, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

 Not done Controversial change with possibility of long terms results. Please raise this issue at Commons talk:Licensing to get a consensus on any change that may lead to deletion of existing images or revising of current policy regarding interpretation of {{PD-India}} --Justass (talk) 23:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

All right, thanks. Will do. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:15, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

It is to be found here. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Malayalam Translations

{{editprotected}} Please replace current texts with text including Malayalam Translations:

{{LangSwitch
|en=''This work is in the [[public domain]] in [[India]] because its term of copyright has expired.''
* The Indian Copyright Act applies in India, to works first published in India.
* According to [http://www.education.nic.in/CprAct.pdf The Indian Copyright Act, 1957] (Chapter V Section 25), Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year (ie. as of {{CURRENTYEAR}}, works published prior to 1 January {{ #expr: {{CURRENTYEAR}} - 60 }} are considered public domain). Posthumous works (other than those above) enter the public domain after 60 years from publication date. Any other kind of work enters the public domain 60 years after the author's death. Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright.
|ml=''ഈ കൃതിയുടെ പകർപ്പവകാശ കാലാവധി അവസാനിച്ചിരിക്കുന്നതിനാൽ [[India|ഇന്ത്യയിൽ]] ഇത് [[public domain|പൊതുസഞ്ചയത്തിൽ]] പെടുന്നു.''
* ആദ്യം ഇന്ത്യയിൽ പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിക്കപ്പെട്ട സൃഷ്ടികൾക്ക് ഇന്ത്യൻ പകർപ്പവകാശ ചട്ടം ബാധകമാണ്.
* [http://www.education.nic.in/CprAct.pdf ഇന്ത്യൻ പകർപ്പവകാശ ചട്ടം, 1957] (ആദ്ധ്യായം V ഭാഗം 25) പ്രകാരം, അജ്ഞാതരുടെ കൃതികൾ, ഫോട്ടോഗ്രാഫുകൾ, ചലച്ചിത്ര സൃഷ്ടികൾ, ശബ്ദ റെക്കോർഡിങ്ങുകൾ, ഭരണകൂടത്തിന്റെ സൃഷ്ടികൾ, കോർപ്പറേറ്റുകളുടെ സൃഷ്ടികൾ അല്ലെങ്കിൽ അന്താരാഷ്ട്ര സംഘടനകളുടെ സൃഷ്ടികൾ എന്നിവ ആദ്യം പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ച് 60 വർഷങ്ങൾക്കു ശേഷം പൊതുസഞ്ചയത്തിലായിത്തീരുന്നു, ബന്ധപ്പെട്ട കലണ്ടർ വർഷത്തിന്റെ തുടക്കം മുതലായിരിക്കും ഇതു കണക്കിലാക്കുക (അതായത് {{CURRENTYEAR}}-ൽ, 1 ജനുവരി {{ #expr: {{CURRENTYEAR}} - 60 }}-യ്ക്കു മുമ്പുണ്ടായിരുന്നവ പൊതുസഞ്ചയത്തിലായതായി കണക്കാക്കുന്നു). മരണാനന്തരം നടന്ന നിർമ്മിതികൾ (മുകളിൽ പറഞ്ഞിരിക്കുന്നവ അല്ലാത്തവ) പ്രസിദ്ധീകരണ തീയതിയ്ക്ക് 60 വർഷങ്ങൾക്കു ശേഷം പൊതുസഞ്ചയത്തിലായിത്തീരുന്നു. മറ്റേതുവിധത്തിലുള്ള കൃതികളും സ്രഷ്ടാവിന്റെ മരണാനന്തരം 60 വർഷങ്ങൾക്കു ശേഷം പൊതുസഞ്ചയത്തിലായിത്തീരുന്നു. നിയമങ്ങൾ, ന്യായാധിപരുടെ അഭിപ്രായങ്ങൾ, ഭരണകൂട സംബന്ധിയായ മറ്റ് അറിയിപ്പുകൾ എല്ലാം പകർപ്പവകാശത്തിൽ നിന്നും സ്വതന്ത്രമായിരിക്കും.
}}

and also replace current second text with this text

{{LangSwitch
|en=This file may not be in the public domain outside India. The creator and year of publication are essential information and must be provided. See [[w:Wikipedia:Public domain|Wikipedia:Public domain]] and [[W:Wikipedia:Copyrights|Wikipedia:Copyrights]] for more details.''
|ml=ഈ പ്രമാണം ഇന്ത്യയ്ക്കു പുറത്ത് പൊതുസഞ്ചയത്തിലായിരിക്കണമെന്നില്ല. സ്രഷ്ടാവിന്റെ പേരും പ്രസിദ്ധീകരിച്ച വർഷവും നൽകിയിരിക്കേണ്ട അത്യാവശ്യ വിവരമാണ്. കൂടുതൽ വിവരങ്ങൾക്ക് [[w:Wikipedia:Public domain|പൊതുസഞ്ചയം]], [[W:Wikipedia:Copyrights|പകർപ്പവകാശം]] എന്നീ താളുകൾ കാണുക.
}}

Thank you--Praveen:talk 18:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done Converted to standard autotranslation, see Template:PD-India/ml --Mormegil (talk) 13:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Great! Thank you--Praveen:talk 14:14, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Deprecate?

Now that the URAA has been found to be constitutional, I suggest this template be merged with {{PD-India-URAA}}. Until 2018, when currently copyrighted works from 1923 become public domain everything that's PD in the U.S. will fall under that template—works that were PD on 1 January 1996, those that were published before 1942 (if anonymous, etc.) or whose authors died before 1942. (See en:Wikipedia:Non-U.S._copyrights#Dates_of_restoration_and_terms_of_protection, this was brought up at Commons:Deletion requests/All files copyrighted in the US under the URAA.) Tagging this as deprecated and moving files over or deleting those that aren't PD would be the way to do this, also adding details of India's copyright term to the other template, I guess. If the template is not deprecated and merged, either every work using this will need to templates, or the URAA template will need to be merged here and then each image checked. —innotata 00:27, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

It may still be useful to indicate the current copyright status in India, for users outside the U.S. Sort of why {{PD-old}} asks for a second, US-specific template if the work in question was from outside the U.S. And BTW, works for authors who died 1941 or later got restored by the URAA (provided they were published 1923 or later), not 1942 -- so only pre-1941 works are OK. Carl Lindberg (talk) 00:47, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

1941, since Indian copyright terms are not counted the normal way (as the template currently points out), and the law came into effect December 31, 1991 according to the Wikipedia page. My suggestion was that they be merged with the details of Indian copyright status moved to the other template; if the templates are kept as at present, every image we can keep will need both templates to indicate copyright status. —innotata 01:15, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that's a good idea. The copyright status in USA and outside are 2 different things, so it is better to have 2 differents templates. Yann (talk) 04:22, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I forgot, and Carl didn't mention that there are also some works published before 1923 that would use those tags. But something needs to be fixed hmm … I think a warning mentioning the 1923 and 1941 cutoffs is needed. —innotata 22:05, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Here's a bit of a warning, as the text of the template's going to get really long if we want to mention many details:

This work is in the public domain in India because its term of copyright has expired. The Indian Copyright Act applies in India, to works first published in India. According to The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 (amended 1992) (Chapter V Section 25), Anonymous works, photographs, cinematographic works, sound recordings, government works, and works of corporate authorship or of international organizations enter the public domain 60 years after the date on which they were first published, counted from the beginning of the following calendar year (ie. as of 2024, works published prior to 1 January 1964 are considered public domain). Posthumous works (other than those above) enter the public domain after 60 years from publication date. Any other kind of work enters the public domain 60 years after the author's death. Text of laws, judicial opinions, and other government reports are free from copyright. You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States. Note that this work might not be in the public domain in countries that do not apply the rule of the shorter term and have copyright terms longer than life of the author plus 60 years. In particular, Mexico is 100 years, Jamaica is 95 years, Colombia is 80 years, Guatemala and Samoa are 75 years, and Switzerland and the United States are 70 years.

Mind if I add it? —innotata 16:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Link doesn't work

{{Editprotected}}

External link to the Indian Copyright act 1957 doesn't work. Please change it to

http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/CopyrightRules1957.pdf

This link is in the left side bar of
http://copyright.gov.in/

Under Acts and rules.

--Gauravjuvekar (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done You could have changed it, as the actual text are in their own subpages for their language. :) Techman224^Talk 04:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Before 1958

{{Editprotected}}

1. "Photographs created before the independance are in the public domain 50 years after creation, as per the Copyright Act 1911." ->"Photographs created before 1958 are in the public domain 50 years after creation, as per the Copyright Act 1911."
2. Remove: "as of 2012, works published prior to 1 January 1952 are considered public domain" since "as of 2012, works published prior to 1 January 1958 are considered public domain"

--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I changed #1. For #2, this is for all works. Only pictures from before 1958 are in the public domain. Yann (talk) 06:01, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

REf: http://copyright.gov.in/ : "The Copyright Act, 1957 came into effect from January 1958. ... Prior to the Act of 1957, the Law of Copyrights in the country was governed by the Copyright Act of 1914."

--Redtigerxyz (talk) 04:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Still dont prove it works for other works Béria Lima ^msg 16:29, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I've never seen any hard evidence that pre-1958 photographs still have their term based on the date of creation. It is true the earlier copyright law was 50 years from creation, and the 1958 law was not retroactive, so any photographs created 1907 or earlier definitely expired before the 1958 law and remained public domain. However, it is entirely possible that photographs still under copyright at the time had their terms changed to that of the new law, which was 50 years from publication instead of creation (photos published 1941 or later were later extended to 60 years from publication). While the 1956 UK law on which India's is based did have an explicit clause stating that earlier UK photographs remained based on their creation date (since changed by the EU directive), I have not seen a similar clause in India's law. However I have seen a legal scholar claim that a mistake in the law's wording meant that earlier works did not get the new terms at all, which creates further uncertainty. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I would be very surprised if the Indian law is not similar to the UK law on this point. This is how it is effectively applied. I am going to see with Wikimedia India chapter if a confirmation can be obtainted from a lawyer. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:46, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I am not a legal expert but do examine "79. Repeals, savings and transitional provisions" - 79-(3) "Copyright shall not subsist by virtue of this Act in any work in which copyright did not subsist immediately before the commencement of this Act under any Act repealed by sub-section (1)" and - 79-(4) "Where copyright subsisted in any work immediately before the commencement of this Act, the rights comprising such copyright shall, as from the date of such commencement, be the rights specified in section 14 in relation to the class of works to which such work belongs..." Shyamal (talk) 13:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

The UK law had a very explicit section on the term of earlier photographs; the Indian law did not. They were an independent country by that point, so they may have picked and chosen the parts they wanted from the UK act. The portions of article 79 quoted above did not restore any copyrights previously lost, and definitely applied the new scope of copyright to earlier works (it explicitly specifies section 14), but is silent on extending the term, which is in a different section, and which therefore creates my question. There is this editorial which opines that the omission of explicit language regarding the term does in fact mean that the previous terms continue to apply to works existing in 1957. India changed the law again in 1992, retroactive to 1991, with the clear intent of extending the terms of existing works from 50 to 60 years. So even if the 1957 law did not extend, it would seem the 1992 law did, making any photo created 1941 or later based on publication. But... the linked editorial says the 1992 law made the same mistake as the 1957 one, and did not actually extend terms. So this might be a difference between the intent of the Indian legislature versus the actual language, particularly when it comes to the 1992 law. It's possible courts could rule with the intent though... which is why I'd be hesitant to use the editorial's logic without a court decision to validate it. Carl Lindberg (talk) 04:31, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I have a contact with a lawyer from the Software Freedom Law Center in New York who will look into this issue. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

"This file may not be in the public domain outside India."

Why does this section only link to Wikipedia? Shouldn't there at least be a link to COM:PD? Shouldn't this include {{PD-old-warning-text|60}} as well? --El Grafo (talk) 08:20, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy - Government of India

Please see the discussion at VPC regarding government works. Jee 14:19, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Photographs are now 60pma

In 2012, India removed section 25 from their law, meaning photographs are now 60pma like regular artistic works.[3][4]. There do not seem to be any transitional sections to state what the terms are for existing photographs. Based on the sections in the original 1957 law, and based on some discussions above, it would seem as though just the new scope is applied to existing works, while the term remains the same. So it's possible that the 60pma term is only for photos created (or maybe first published) after June 2012, with existing photos still being 60 years from publication. Really not sure. If the latter, changing the tag isn't all that urgent (won't have realistic effects for another 53 years) but we should probably mention it. Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Change URL

Hello Admin,

Change url to this for working.

https://copyright.gov.in/documents/copyrightrules1957.pdf ChiK (talk) 17:41, 29 September 2023 (UTC)