Copyright Stakes in the India-EU FTA

Why in News?

The India-EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations concluded in January 2026, and the European Commission has published the negotiated texts. The FTA contains a dedicated Intellectual Property (IP) Chapter (Chapter 10).

The copyright provisions of the FTA have raised concerns about their possible impact on education, research, libraries and Internet services in India. However, the agreement will not automatically amend India’s Copyright Act 1957. 

What is the core issue?

• India’s Copyright Act, 1957 protects creators while allowing certain uses of their works without permission, for example, specified educational activities, research and library preservation.
• The editorial argues that the FTA could strengthen copyright enforcement without adequately safeguarding these public-interest exceptions. 

Key Legal Concepts Defined:

• National Treatment Clause: A foundational rule in international trade. It requires a country to treat foreign citizens and businesses the same as its own domestic citizens. In this context, it means foreign copyright owners should get the same rights and protections as Indian copyright owners.
• WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT):
  • An international treaty that protects copyright in the digital environment. It covers computer programs, qualifying databases, online communication of works and protection against interference with digital safeguards. 
  • WCT also recognises the need to balance authors’ rights with education, research and access to information. It includes guidelines for both protecting digital content and allowing exceptions for public interest (like teaching or research).
• Technological Protection Measures (TPMs) / Digital Locks: Software or encryption used by creators to stop people from copying or accessing digital content (e.g., password protections, digital rights management or DRM).
• Rights-Management Information (RMI): Digital data attached to a work that identifies the creator, copyright owner, and terms of use (e.g., digital watermarks).

The Main Concerns Explained:

1. Imbalance of Power (Stronger enforcement, fewer safeguards):

• The draft FTA explicitly protects digital locks and RMI. This makes it much easier for copyright owners to block access to their digital material and legally punish anyone who tries to bypass these locks.
• However, the agreement does not give equal clarity to the “safeguards”- the rules that protect the public’s right to use material.

2. The Exclusion of the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT): 

• Because the WCT is excluded from the National Treatment clause, the balanced framework is not fully integrated into the treaty’s equal-treatment rules. This creates an imbalance:
  • The FTA strongly enforces the restrictive parts of copyright law.
  • The FTA does not give clarity about the legal protections for exceptions that India’s domestic laws currently guarantee.

3. Threats to Public Interest Exceptions

• Indian copyright law currently has “fair dealing” exceptions that allow students, researchers, libraries, and software developers to use copyrighted material without paying or getting permission. 
• The fear is that under the new FTA, a foreign company could use digital locks to block a student or researcher, and Indian law might not have the clear authority to stop them.

This structural imbalance directly threatens Section 65A of India’s Copyright Act, 1957, which deals with TPMs. Section 65A(2) provides exceptions under which technological protection can be circumvented, particularly for the purposes permitted therein. 65A(2) acts as a crucial safety valve, ensuring that technical restrictions do not completely block legitimate, lawful activities such as education, research, software testing, and library preservation that are already permitted under Indian copyright law.

Core Impact Areas: 

1. Education & Research:

• The Risk: Digital locks can block teachers and students from accessing or copying portions of e-books and online journals.
• The Consequence: Users face heavy dependence on expensive extra licenses for actions otherwise legally permitted for classroom instruction.

2. Software Innovation:

• The Risk: Broad bans on bypassing digital locks restrict developers from studying existing software code.
• The Consequence: Fear of litigation discourages legitimate software testing, security research, and building compatible (interoperable) programs.

3. Libraries & Archives:

• The Risk: Technical restrictions can legally block libraries from copying protected digital collections.
• The Consequence: Staff cannot migrate files out of obsolete formats, causing digital content to become permanently unreadable.

4. Internet Service Providers (ISPs)

• The Risk: Internet routing automatically creates temporary digital copies in computer memory and network caches.
• The Consequence: Without clear exceptions for these routine technical operations, ISPs face high compliance costs and increased lawsuit risks.

Judicial Precedent: The Delhi University Photocopy Case (2016)

• The Precedent: This landmark case affirmed the strength of India’s educational exceptions (Section 52(1)(i)), ruling that copying for instructional use does not constitute copyright infringement.
• The Limitation: While it protects legitimate teaching and research, it does not grant blanket permission to copy entire works or bypass digital locks indiscriminately.

Way Forward: 

• Preserve WCT-consistent flexibility: India should seek clarity that the FTA does not prevent the country from maintaining limitations and exceptions recognised under its Copyright Act and compatible with international obligations.
• Reconcile enforcement with exceptions: Anti-circumvention and rights-management provisions should operate alongside, rather than override, legitimate statutory exceptions.
• Protect legitimate research: Exceptions for interoperability, software testing, cybersecurity research and education should remain legally effective even in a DRM-dominated environment.
• Safeguard digital intermediaries: The treatment of transient and incidental copies should be clearly aligned with India’s statutory framework so that routine Internet operations do not generate disproportionate copyright liability.
• Protect libraries and archives: Copyright policy should recognise the special requirements of digital preservation, format-shifting and archival access, subject to safeguards against commercial misuse.
• Maintain parliamentary policy space: Any international commitment should preserve Parliament’s ability to calibrate copyright law in response to technological change, educational needs and public interest.
• Establish a continuing India-EU copyright dialogue: A dedicated mechanism for discussing emerging issues such as AI training, text-and-data mining, digital preservation, cybersecurity research and generative AI would help prevent future conflicts between trade commitments and domestic digital policy.

Copyright exceptions must apply to certain special cases, avoid conflict with the work’s normal exploitation, and avoid unreasonable prejudice to the rightsholder’s legitimate interests. This test already appears in TRIPS Article 13 and WCT Article 10.

India should use the FTA to strengthen protection for creators while keeping lawful education, research and preservation accessible. 

Prelims Practice MCQ

Q. With reference to digital copyright, consider the following statements:

1. Technological Protection Measures may restrict access to or copying of digital works.
2. The WIPO Copyright Treaty allows appropriate limitations and exceptions in the digital environment.
3. Every educational use of a copyrighted work is exempt from copyright liability in India.

Which statements are correct?

(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3

Answer: (a). Educational exceptions under Indian law have a defined scope and conditions.

Mains Practice Question:

Q. How can India balance copyright protection with access to education and research in the digital age? Discuss in the context of its trade agreements.

PDF