Hello,
Today, I got you two exciting archival documents regarding the Berne Convention, specifically the time when India was on the verge of denouncing it.
But here’s the context first …
Some of our readers might already be familiar with the twists and turns of Indian copyright history—or may have read the exciting account by Prashant and Sumathi, which tells the story of India’s engagement with the Berne Convention. This multilateral treaty, first adopted in 1886, is considered the beginning of international copyright law to which India was made a member during the colonial period.
The Berne Convention requires its members to extend copyright protection to foreign authors and to guarantee a minimum set of rights. Since its inception, it has undergone multiple revisions, each shaping the law in significant ways. Among these, the 1967 revision conference held in Stockholm stands out—not only for the Convention itself but also for India’s relationship with it.
While India’s first appearance in international copyright law as a self-governing country took place at the 1948 Brussels Conference (fun fact: we didn’t even have enough funds to send a proper delegate then), it was the 1967 Conference that marked an actual boiling point—so much so that it is often referred to as the “International Copyright Crisis.”
At Stockholm, India, joined hands with African nations, took the game into their own hands. Meaning, they pushed for a fundamental reshaping of international copyright norms to better reflect their developmental needs, particularly regarding access to education and knowledge. The developed nations, especially the UK and France, weren’t very happy about it. (See KEI’s summary of Charles F. Johnson’s Timeline of the Origins of the 1967 Stockholm Protocol for developing countries.)
The scene at the Stockholm Conference was so charged that several countries went so far as to threaten withdrawal from the convention altogether. For newly independent states, the convention seemed heavily tilted in favour of copyright-exporting nations of the Global North.
In this scene, India—barely two decades removed from colonial rule—emerged as a leading voice of resistance. After all, it was a time when books were expensive, royalty payments were high, and translation costs were also high, especially for newly independent nations. Meanwhile, copyright laws acted as colonial chains.
At the time, India was also in the process of developing its first independent copyright law, which would eventually replace the colonial-era Copyright Act of 1914. Before the enactment of the Copyright Act of 1957, a draft Copyright Bill was introduced in 1955. That bill, based on the principles of the Universal Copyright Convention (UCC), proposed a markedly different approach, offering less protection to authors than the Berne Convention required. (Shivam Kaushik discussed this bill here.)
While neither the 1955 Bill became law nor did the Stockholm revision conference come to fruition, it left an important lesson as to what a collective action by developing nations can do.
Although I was aware of this story through various sources, I couldn’t find specific ones that contained these proposals to denounce Berne. I recently discovered them while going through dusty digital files at the National Archives of India.
The two pertinent documents in this regard are one from 1949 featuring a speech by Minister Chandan Lal, arguing that India should “free” itself from international copyright law altogether. And another from 1969, where India, now a self-declaring nation, was considering a proposal after seeing the rigid position of the UK at the 1967 revision conference. Both offer an interesting read about India’s early engagement with international copyright law.
While I leave these documents for you, our readers, to parse and problematize, I can quickly flag a curious tension that runs through these documents (especially the 1969 one)—between resistance and ethical responsibility. There, India wasn’t just being hostile; it was also ethically thinking about the kind of world it wanted to be part of. It didn’t just agree to what the UK publishers offered after the 1967 conference, but also took into account the African nations that supported it during the conference. There are, of course, more details that one can find there.
Okay, that’s it for the context. The following are the documents. (If they don’t open from the link, type the italicised part in the search bar of Abhilekh Patal. However, you may need to register on the website to read the documents. They cannot be downloaded. However, if you cannot access the document at all, feel free to let me know. )
- Copyright Question of Amending the Indian Copyright Act,1914-Suggestion from Pandit Shiv Charan Lal, Department: Ministry of Education, (Pages: 27) Year: 1949 https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/Category/ItemDetails/ItemDetails?itemId=14fc3ff9-0be0-4b8e-b670-534b911b45e1
- International Copyright Convention as Revised an Stockholm Conference Question of Denunciation by India. Department: Ministry of External Affairs, Year: 1969 (Pages: 27) https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/Category/itemdetails/ReadContent?itemId=961e2240-a9af-41db-8a27-0ecc170247d4
Before I conclude, a quick word, too, on the research process, especially for those curious about diving into the archives themselves. The National Archive of India hosts a digital platform called the Abhilekh Patal (https://www.abhilekh-patal.in/) portal, where most of the archives can be accessed. Unfortunately, the website isn’t reader-friendly. It takes a bit of patience to navigate. But once you find your way around, it holds a trove of fascinating material just waiting to be unearthed. If you’re interested in colonial and postcolonial policymaking or the lesser-known stories of legal history, it’s worth a visit!
Conclusion
In sum, India came close—yes, very close—to walking out of the Berne Convention. And had that happened, the entire trajectory of Indian copyright law, and perhaps even global copyright politics, could’ve looked very different.
But there is one more reason why I found these documents interesting. For one, they prompt us to (re)think how India’s postcolonial copyright policy has been historically framed, not merely as resistant or compliant, but as a player navigating a complex field of ethical, strategic, and political considerations.
Finally, for those interested, the following scholarship offers a helpful entry point into the history of copyright law—particularly the debates surrounding the Stockholm Revision Conference:
- Barbara Ringer, the Stockholm Intellectual Property Conference of 1967, 14 Bull. Copyright Soc’y U.S.A. 417 (1966-1967).
- Irwin A. Olian, Jr. “International Copyright and the Needs of Developing Countries: The Awakening at Stockholm and Paris,” 7 Cornell Int’l L. J. 81 (1973-1974).
- Eva Hemmungs Wirtén, “Colonial Copyright, Postcolonial Publics: The Berne Convention and the 1967 Stockholm Diplomatic Conference Revisited,” (2010) 7:3 SCRIPTed 532
I’ll share more stories in the coming days. See you there.