New Delhi based Gyaana Books recently launched a new title called Pink Sheep by Mahesh Natarajan. The eighteen stories in this collection are prize winners in their own way. Each story deals with relationships – love, confusion, contentment, desire, fear, hurt, happiness, bitterness, victory, or loss – in a slightly different context. Natarajan highlights different aspects of gay life, and shows how these men yearn for the same things everybody yearns for – acceptance and a fulfilling life.

The Ilchi Lee book, Brain Wave Vibration has reached international acclaim. The book publisher BEST Life Media has sold the rights to publish this natural healing wonder in eight languages in ten different foreign countries like France, Germany, Russia, Japan, China and Taiwan. Using meditation and energy for this new brain fitness routine, this success marks the rise of brain health aspirations globally.

Starting in the year 1996, NBT embarked upon a very successful initiative of providing training in book publishing through introductory and intensive courses of fortnight to one month in different parts of the country. Latest in the series was the course organized at Pune between December 6-18, 2010. Experts from various fields shared their experiences and provided practical lessons to the trainees. There were forty-four participants. The course was organized in collaboration with Marathi Prakashak Sangh, Pune.

Sumit Bhattacharjee, assistant director of NBT, who is the coordinator of these training courses, is of the view that such training programmes are very useful for various state publishing organizations and the aspirants who wish to enter this field. There is no institution which train human resources for such a huge industry which boasts of third largest in the world in terms of number of titles published in the world in English language. The situation of training in regional languages is still worse, that is why problems of regional language are taken up in these training courses.

In Pune training course, experts from various field including specialists in Marathi publishing were invited to speak on different aspects of publishing. Sridhar Balan spoke on structure of publishing house and where to buy cheap nolvadex online editorial process. Arun Jhakade, shared his ideas on history of Marathi language and its problems and prospects, B N Varma explained the intricacies of developing a manuscript and GS Jolly introduced the importance of ISBN in the present day book promotion and sales. Avinash Pandit spoke on copy editing in Marathi language and gave practical sessions while Madhav Rajguru gave an insight into making of a dictionary and the use of spelling in Marathi. Sharmila Abraham gave practical lessons on copy editing of children’s’ books.

The participants were awarded certificates at the completion of the course. Next training course will be organized at Silchar from February 24 to March 8, 2011.

says Chandramohan Kulkarni, who has created a distinct niche for himself, be it in the sphere of book illustrations in Marathi or his art works. His illustrations and viagra online in canada calligraphy are marked by an alluring imaginative flair with a captivating sensitivity shown in the play of lively swinging lines. Here, Chandramohan Kulkarni shares his experiences at his art school.

Art, my passion…

Chandramohan KulkarniAfter I finished high school, my father said, let’s put you in a drawing school and so I landed at the Abhinav School of Arts. Those days getting admission was not so difficult. Marks in final high school exam hardly mattered and apart from drawing, I didn’t have any interest or marks in other subjects. My high school drop-out police constable father, though rough and tough in appearance and behaviour, had a tender heart. He did not even once question my career decision. The Khaki police uniform understood the value of lines, shapes and colours. He did not think even for a minute about when and how much I will earn after I become an artist.

Art: an expensive affair…

In an art school, apart from college fees, there are many incidental expenses - paper, colours, brushes, rulers, pencils, T-square, set square and what not. In short- art material, which was a costly affair. My father could have sought fee-waiver by submitting his salary documents. But he never did that. So I started working in the morning and evening, outside my college hours. The work was related to drawing.

My classroom memories…

I still remember the classroom for the foundation course. It was a large room and its windows had dark green curtains. Our ‘gang’ liked the colour of the curtains so much that we wanted to make identical shoulder bags to carry drawing material to college. In spite of searching the market, we could not get the fabric that we wanted. So one day, we took away a couple of curtains from the corner windows and got the bags stitched at home. Our teacher used to glance at these bags with suspicion for a long time after that.

There were more than a hundred students in the class, so groups were made according to surnames. Jakkal and I happened to be in the same group. (Later Jakkal was hanged after he and his other friends were found guilty in the series of murders in Pune. These murders shook the country at that time.)

My love for 3D…

Khatawakar Sir used to teach 3D in foundation course. Khatawakar sir used to teach us to ‘subtract’ the chalk from a chalk and what was left was 3D- a chain, female figure, male figure, tower, chain, pillar- anything. It was fun. Parag once took me to Khatawakar’s sculpture studio in the famous Tulshibaug area of Pune. There for the first time in my life, I fiddled with clay. We were allowed to do anything, but first we had to mix clay ourselves. For the first few days we just had to learn to mix and ‘knead’ the clay. Sculpting started after that. Armatures came much later.

We had to make ‘something’ from thermocol in the 3D class. For submissions we made something mundane like a cube, pyramid etc, but the skills came in handy to make sky lanterns for Diwali. Our ‘workshop’ was in Parag’s room. Using the techniques learnt in class, we made beautiful thermocol sky lanterns with intricate designs and viagra pfizer india i recommend sold them ourselves standing on the street. We made enough money to pay the tuition fee for the second term.

Isn’t that education?

During Diwali holidays, I painted name boards of temporary shops selling fire crackers and rate cards of various crackers. During my foundation and elementary years, my lettering was good. I worked in a painter’s shop or worked under painter K B Dev at intermediate level, we started learning calligraphy that soon replaced ‘lettering’. That Diwali we used special calligraphic techniques to paint the boards- very artistic, with different strokes. The shop owner did not approve them. He yelled at us, ‘ What is this gibberish writing? Not a single word can be read. Do it again.’ We did it all over again with simple ‘lettering’. But could pay the fees from that job.

That also was education…

In the second year, we studied a painful subject called ‘life drawing’. A man sat on a high stool or chair and the 10-15 students in that group gathered around in semi-circle, observed him and drew his picture.

Even if we wanted to ‘study’ sincerely, we were faced with numerous problems: our ‘model’ sat with partially closed eyes, so we could not see his eyes properly. Jakkal was smart. His father had a photo studio. During the long break he would take the model to his studio on his motorcycle, make him sit in the same pose, take his photos, and bring him back to college. After college he would finish his drawing in the studio from the negative using an enlarger. Cent percent proportionate drawing. I wondered how he could draw so well.

What an education!

My mother was a voracious reader. Because of her I saw many movies and read a lot. Wasn’t I fortunate to have parents who encouraged me to pursue career in drawing; who wrote and read poems, who encouraged me to read, watch movies?

I used to buy old Diwali issues of famous magazines like Satyakatha, Deepawali, Mouj, Hans, Nawal etc. I could see the works of great artists in those issues. When I was in Intermediate, I got an opportunity to draw for Hans and Nawal. While handing over the manuscript, editor Antarkar used to warn, ‘Be careful. It’s precious. You can’t afford to lose it.’ Even today, in this era of photocopying, scanning, and DTP, I take extreme care of all manuscripts and reserve these.

That’s education…

Udupi sir introduced me to beautiful lettering. We became friends when I was in the Elementary course. He was not my teacher for any subject, but he taught me a lot outside the classroom. During lunch he sat with us and we endlessly drew letters on papers. He was the only teacher who let us borrow books in his name and paid the fine himself if we lost them. I understood the power of letters because of him and got acquainted with stalwarts in advertising through the books he gave me to read.

Gondhalekar sir taught us History of Art. While teaching ‘History of art’ he explained the distinction between ‘work of art’ and ‘art of work’. How true that distinction holds even today!

Those were our teachers. Some professionals turned teachers and some teachers turned professionals. Avachat sir showed us that good artists do not usually become teachers; and even if they do, they do not continue long there.

When did I learn to make portraits?

In commercial art, it’s essential to achieve a plain colour effect. I could never manage that. My paper always had clouds and bumps on it. So I studied and practiced the cloudy effect. Experimented a lot, used enormous amount of paint, scarped a lot of paint. Can’t figure out whether it shaped me or took me off the track. The crux of the matter is, nobody teaches you drawing and painting; it should not be taught and it should not be learnt. Like all other arts, you have to shape and mould yourself and have to find your own path.

The ancient art school buildings will always be there…

They have two doors. The smaller one leads to the art school. It holds a bigger door inside it - the door to the world outside. You enter the art school through the small door. You spend some time there; linger for some time; enjoy the experience. After a while the other door opens - the bigger one that takes you out in the world. There you are on your own. It’s your world. Here you can do what you like.

The proposed amendments to the Copyright Act introduced in 2010 have provoked a lot of healthy discussion, but unfortunately also some acrimonious controversy. A law that is so important—both culturally and economically—should be amended participatively, involving all interest groups, in response to felt needs, new technologies and emerging international trends, discusses Jagdish Sagar.

The amendments till now

It is interesting to reflect that the 1994 amendments – which in their time were no less far-reaching – did not take any of the main interest groups by surprise. This time round, there was a strong feeling of having been taken by surprise: the widely representative Core Committee that had been set up earlier was never convened after 2005, and the Bill when introduced went far beyond the ground that had been covered in earlier discussions sponsored by the HRD Ministry. It is probably this—and the consequent deficiencies in the draft—rather than the Ministry’s wholly unexceptionable intent to protect author and consumer interests, that created such consternation. Not having been exposed to the brain-storming process that such legislation needs, the Bill bristled with ambiguities and apparently unintended consequences.

Both the Copyright Bill 1956 and the Copyright (Amendment Bill) 1992 were referred to Joint Select Committees. This time Parliament adopted the quicker expedient of referring the matter to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resource Development. In the short time available to it the Committee did give a hearing to the interest groups which had made representations (though it did not invite any of the expert witnesses nominated by the Ministry, leaving that gap in the inputs available to it).

To its credit the Committee recommended the removal of some of the seriously anomalous provisions in the Bill, including the well-intended but ill-conceived proposals to amend Sections 33, 34 and 35 pertaining to Copyright Societies, the proposed new definition of “author” in regard to films, and the like. In many cases, however, the Committee has merely given the Ministry a word of caution, and put the ball back entirely into the Ministry’s court. It is to be hoped that this time the Ministry will adopt a more participative approach before introducing a revised version of the Bill in Parliament.

The comments that follow are not exhaustive, but touch on a few important issues, starting with one that is of particular concern to the book publishing industry—though it also affects DVDs, CDs and the like.

Parallel Imports

The proposed insertion of a new proviso in Section 2 (m)/Copyright Act is difficult to understand: it has implications that surely could not have been intended.

There is no dispute about the permissibility in general of parallel imports of copyright works (except for some special exceptions in the case of software, films and sound recordings). It is a misconception that this proposed amendment introduces any new principle of exhaustion of rights in a work after first sale in the interests of consumers. The doctrine of exhaustion already applies to all literary, dramatic and musical works under Section 14(a)(ii) of the Copyright Act, and to artistic works under Section 14(c)(iii): for such works the copyright owner has no statutory rights in a copy that has already been sold once.

The issue here is, rather, that the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the contractual freedom which the same Act gives to copyright owners to assign their rights territorially, rather than globally. Under Section 18 of the Copyright Act, an assignment can be limited to any particular territory (or period of time, or particular rights only). Further, in the absence of specific contractual agreement to the contrary, it is even deemed to be limited to India under Section 19(6) of the Act. The problem with the proposed amendment is that it creates an anomalous situation which seriously affects the publishing industry.

The person in a foreign country who has a limited right to publish a work in that country, infringes copyright by exporting the work to India (see Section 51(1)(a)). The intention of the proposed amendments, apparently, is nevertheless to allow the free import of competing copies notwithstanding that the person exporting them to India has no right to do so, by creating the legal fiction that the copies imported into India are not “infringing copies” as they otherwise would be.

To sell a book in India, a foreign publisher often finds it advantageous to grant an assignment or an exclusive licence purely for a low priced Indian edition. The threat to the Indian publisher who publishes such a book at an appropriate price for the Indian market is that, despite being the sole copyright-owner of the book in India, he cannot stop anyone else from sending competing copies (not necessarily cheaper copies, let it be added) into India. Again and conversely an Indian publisher might license a foreign edition for sale only in one or more foreign countries, but won’t be able to keep copies made under such licence out of India.

The implications for consumers are by no means as rosy as intended. In the long term it does not help them to discourage Indian publishers from bringing out Indian editions of books under licence. And we need to remember that it is not only publishers but also authors who have been objecting to this proposed amendment.

Treaty Compliance and Compulsory Licensing

A more general problem with the Bill, which has not received the attention it needs, is the implications which it has for Treaty compliance. We cannot afford to make our legislation non-compliant with the Berne Convention, not only because of the loss of global protection for Indian works that it would entail, but also because the operative provisions of the Berne Conventin have been incorporated in the TRIPS Agreement. Hence, India might potentially be subjected to wider sanctions through the WTO merely because of a thoughtless amendment to the Copyright Act.

The existing provisions on compulsory licenses in Chapter VI of the Copyright Act have been very carefully designed in order not to conflict with our international obligations under the Berne Convention. Our obligations under the Berne Convention make it impossible for us to issue compulsory licenses against foreign works except where specifically permitted by the Convention, notably in the specific cases referred to in the Appendix to the 1971 Act of the Berne Convention. (In fact, because the Government of India failed to renew our declaration availing of the Appendix to the Berne Convention in the late 1990s, even those exceptions are no longer actually available to us and even in its present form the Act is no longer Berne compliant; since no compulsory licences have actually been issued under the relevant provisions, this problem remains quiescent.)

The implications of the proposed amendments of Sections 31, 31A and 31A(1) making compulsory licences which are currently available only against Indian works available against foreign works as well, are therefore, potentially serious. This was pointed out to the Committee but, disappointingly, the Ministry does not appear to have explained the position to them. The Committee has not reached any conclusion on this point but has rightly alerted the Ministry to possible implications.


Again, the starting point and original first objective of the whole exercise to amend the Copyright Act was to make our law compliant with the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and WIPO Performers and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT), enabling us to ratify these treaties. Hence, among other things, the enhancement of performers’ rights. However, one of the main provisions of both these treaties is the requirement of remedies against the circumvention of technological measures (access control and/or use control of works on the Internet). Unfortunately, the proposed amendments do not achieve this objective; rather will create further penalties for infringement by means of circumventing technological measures, but they do not make such circumvention, or the provision of devices enabling such circumvention, into infringing acts per se. The amendments thus fall short of the requirements of these treaties.

Statutory Licences

Another concern for copyright owners is the implications of the proposed statutory licences for broadcasting. It is necessary to consider the need for such a provision (admittedly not contrary to the Berne Convention, but optional) with reference to the relevant industries in India and not merely because such licences exist abroad. Another problem with the draft is that, while the marginal headings seem to indicate an intention to limit the scope of this amendment to radio broadcasting, the proposed Section itself does not do so: there is certainly no apparent case for allowing such statutory licences for television broadcasting.


The earlier proposed restrictions on the author’s right to transfer rights in the works included in a film have been modified considerably by the Committee. The Bill proposed to provide that an author of a literary (but not a dramatic) or a musical work should not be able to assign the “right to receive royalty” once the work had been included in a film. This was confusing, to say the least, since the “right to receive royalty” is not a statutory but a contractual right. Again, it subjected the author to commercial risk, depriving him of the possibility of a one-time up-front payment: beneficial if the film was a “hit,” harmful to author interests in the case of “flop” films—and surely the latter outnumber the former.

Now the Committee’s suggestion is that the author of literary or musical works included in a cinematograph film shall not assign or waive the right to receive royalties to be shared on an equal basis with the assignee of copyright for the utilization of such work in any form other than for the communication to the public of the work along with the cinematograph film in a cinema hall; except to the author’s legal heirs or to a copyright society for collection and distribution, and any agreement to contrary shall be void.

This means in effect that every author has a right to a 50% royalty from the film producer for non-theatrical exploitation once the work is included in a cinematographic film: but 50% of what? And what do we mean by sharing royalties on an equal basis with the copyright owner? And how can each author of every work included in a film get 50% (of whatever is meant by 50%)? No clearer than before, and even more difficult to enforce.

Further, this proposal does away with the usual variability of licence rates according to the nature of exploitation, e.g., there might be justification for higher royalty for internet exploitation, where the producer makes less investment, and lower royalty in other cases like the distribution of physical copies. Moreover the provision still creates various and unforeseeable anomalies: for example, in the case of a novel which was first published in book format and then included in a cinematographic film.

There is no denying that assignments once made by an author can prove onerous later: the provisions of Section 19A were introduced in 1994 precisely to address this problem, and perhaps the Copyright Board needs to be made more effective to discharge its duties by making this provision more effective. Another author-friendly amendment of the Act made in 1994, the introduction of a resale share right (commonly known as droit de suite) in Section 53A, has never taken effect because the Copyright Board has failed to perform its duty of fixing the author’s resale share. There is much that can be done for authors within the existing law, if the Copyright Board discharges its duties effectively. (Nor is the greater cultural or other importance of the authors of works included in films, as compared to other authors, immediately apparent.) But perceived problems, howsoever genuine, are not solved by unrealistic or unviable solutions.

On a concluding note

There is much more that could be said. As I stated, this article is not intended to be an exhaustive commentary on the Bill. But the question now is, how participative will the Government be in doing its homework on the Committee’s report before taking it back to Parliament with appropriate changes?