LANDMARK CASE

University of Oxford v. Rameshwari Photocopy Services

(2016) 235 DLT 409 · Delhi High Court · Intellectual property

At a glance

Citation: (2016) 235 DLT 409
Court: Delhi High Court
Area of law: Intellectual property
In one line: The single judge held that reproduction for instruction was fair under Section 52. The case later ended without a final ruling against the shop.

1 Facts

Publishers sued a DU photocopy shop for course packs.

2 Issue

Is making course packs fair dealing?

3 What the court decided

The single judge held that reproduction for instruction was fair under Section 52. The case later ended without a final ruling against the shop.

4 Why it matters

Important for education and copyright.

5 Think about it

Should education get special treatment?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

7 More cases on Intellectual property

Amar Nath Sehgal v. Union of India (2005) 30 PTC 253 (Del)
Cadila Health Care v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals (2001) 5 SCC 73
Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak (2008) 1 SCC 1
Indian Performing Right Society v. Eastern Indian Motion Pictures Association (1977) 2 SCC 820
Novartis AG v. Union of India (2013) 6 SCC 1
R.G. Anand v. Delux Films (1978) 4 SCC 118

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Union of India v. R. Gandhi (Madras Bar Association)Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.