Compare dependency graphs
Put two dependency graphs next to each other and read what the second one states differently from the first: the axioms it adds, removes or relates another way, and the default rules it adds, drops or changes, each with its legal basis, its status and a plain explanation. Nothing shown here is legal advice.
India default rules, version 2, against DALICC deontic dependency graph, version 2.
Axioms: 0 added, 0 removed, 0 changed. Default rules: 0 added, 3 removed, 0 changed.
What the second graph adds
Nothing: every statement of DALICC deontic dependency graph is in India default rules too.
What the second graph does not have
Default rules 3
| Status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
dalicc:moralRightsRestriction
Moral rights restriction
|
Not waivable | India | Copyright Act 1957 section 57(1): the author keeps the right to claim authorship and to restrain, or claim damages for, a distortion, mutilation or modification of the work that would be prejudicial to his honour or reputation, even after the copyright has been assigned; the Act does not say whether these rights can be waived by contract | Proposed |
| What this rule does: This rule adds nothing to a licence that says nothing about moral rights; it reports a finding when a licence permits the licensee to set aside the author's special rights. The Copyright Act 1957 of India lets the author claim authorship and restrain a distortion, mutilation or modification of the work that would be prejudicial to his honour or reputation, even after the copyright has been assigned. The Act does not say whether these rights can be waived by contract, and the finding flags that risk rather than a settled rule. | ||||
dalicc:reverseEngineerForInteroperability
Reverse engineer for interoperability
|
Granted by default | India | Copyright Act 1957 section 52(1)(ab): a lawful possessor of a computer program may do any act necessary to obtain information essential for operating interoperability of an independently created program with other programs, provided the information is not otherwise readily available | Proposed |
| What this rule does: A licence that says nothing about the acts needed for interoperability is read as allowing them. The Copyright Act 1957 of India states that a lawful possessor of a program does not infringe by doing what is necessary to obtain the information essential for an independently created program to operate with other programs, provided that information is not otherwise readily available. Combining a licence that is silent about it with one that prohibits it shows a conflict marked as coming from this rule. | ||||
dalicc:textAndDataMining
Text and data mining
|
Not granted by default | India | Copyright Act 1957 section 52 lists the acts that are not an infringement and names no general exception for text and data mining | Proposed |
| What this rule does: A licence that says nothing about text and data mining is read as not allowing it. The Copyright Act 1957 of India lists the acts that are not an infringement and has no general entry for mining, so a mining act that reproduces a protected work needs a licence that grants it, unless a narrower exception such as fair dealing for private or personal use, including research (section 52(1)(a)(i)), applies to the facts. Combining a licence that is silent about it with one that permits it shows a conflict marked as coming from this rule. | ||||
What both have in a different form
Nothing: no statement is in both graphs in a different form.