Exploring Possibilties for a Right against Destruction for Architects

Authors

  • Jayadevan S Nair School of Law, CHRIST (Deemed to be University)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12728/culj.24.3

Keywords:

Copyright Act 1957, Fair use provisions, Integrity, Moral Rights, The California Art Preservation Act 1979

Abstract

The courts and legal frameworks across the globe have not been unanimous as to whether the right against destruction should be a moral right or not for artists in general and for architects in particular. Both common law and civil law countries have been non-committal and lack uniformity in their approach in this regard. The right against destruction has been distinguished from other rights on the premise that there is no loss/detriment caused to the artist by the destruction of the creation. Despite its beneficent presence in the Copyright Act, 1957 the recent denial of moral rights against destruction to architects in the buildings envisioned and realised by them by the Delhi High Court needs a sound diagnosis and correction as it could have a cascading effect. In this, it deviates from a former ruling of the same (Delhi high court) court without making a substantial reference to it. It raises the issue of whether the basis for anti-destructive sentiment can be placed on the plank of public interest in the preservation of artistic works rather than on personality rights upon which the right to integrity is anchored. An assessment of these contexts will be useful to identify the limits on the right to destroy property particularly intellectual property in architecture.

Downloads

Published

2024-06-27

How to Cite

Nair, J. S. (2024). Exploring Possibilties for a Right against Destruction for Architects. Christ University Law Journal, 13(1), 59-85. https://doi.org/10.12728/culj.24.3