Can you copy judgments, office orders and data from the IP India website into your own product? Partly. Indian copyright law lets anyone reproduce court judgments and Official Gazette matter, but other government works remain protected. A new public notice of 10 November 2026 now says that commercial scraping or republishing of IP India resources, including IP Lex, is not permitted.
This explainer is for legal technology providers, AI developers, law firms and in house teams that use Patent Office material. It sets out the general law first, then the notice, then the position abroad.
- Works made or published by or under the direction or control of the Government, a Legislature or a court are "Government works". The Government is ordinarily their first owner.
- Section 52(1)(q) of the Copyright Act, 1957 permits reproduction of Official Gazette matter and of court and tribunal judgments, unless the court prohibits it. Acts may be reproduced only with commentary or other original matter.
- Other government material, such as office manuals, editorial summaries and databases, does not fall within that exception.
- The CGPDTM notice bars commercial copying, scraping, mirroring or republishing of IP India resources. It also bars use of the IP India and IP Lex names and logo. Non commercial use with acknowledgement is allowed.
- Abroad, the US denies copyright to federal government works. The UK keeps Crown copyright but licenses much of it openly. The EU protects databases through a separate right.
What Indian law protects in government material
Government works. Section 2(k) of the Copyright Act defines a Government work. It covers works made or published under the direction or control of the Government, a Legislature, or an Indian court or tribunal. Under Section 17(d), the Government is the first owner of copyright in such a work, unless there is an agreement to the contrary. Under Section 28, copyright in a published Government work lasts 60 years from the year after first publication.
The official texts exception. Section 52(1)(q) lists acts that are not infringement. They include reproducing or publishing:
- any matter published in an Official Gazette, except an Act of a Legislature.
- an Act of a Legislature, but only together with commentary or other original matter.
- a report of a committee, commission or similar body appointed by the Government, if laid on the Table of the Legislature, unless the Government prohibits it.
- any judgment or order of a court, tribunal or other judicial authority, unless that authority prohibits it.
The exception is narrower than a general public domain rule. It covers the texts it names. It does not cover every document a government office produces.
Copy edited judgments. In Eastern Book Company v D.B. Modak, (2008) 1 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that a law reporter could not claim copyright in the judgments themselves. Copyright required "a minimal degree of creativity". The reporter's own inputs, such as splitting the text into paragraphs, paragraph numbering and marking opinions as concurring or dissenting, were protected. The same distinction between source text and editorial additions matters for any digest of decisions.
What the 10 November notice says
The notice, reference CG/F/CGPDTM/DL-10/5055, was issued by the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks. It covers the name, logo, content, databases and digital resources of IP India, including IP Lex. IP Lex is the Office's monthly digest of Indian IP judgments, prepared by its Legal and Litigation Cell.
The notice states: "No person shall copy, scrape, extract, mirror, frame or republish the said resources", in whole or in substantial part, for commercial gain. It also bars use of the names "Intellectual Property India", "IP India" or "IP Lex", or the logo, and any suggestion of official affiliation. Lawful, bona fide, non commercial use is permitted if the source is acknowledged and no official link is implied. Existing users were given seven days to stop and remove the material.
The notice refers in general terms to IP, emblem, information technology and consumer protection laws. It does not name a specific statute or section. The legal basis for each restriction therefore depends on the material concerned.
What the notice does not change
- It cannot override Section 52(1)(q). A judgment or order of a court or tribunal may still be reproduced, unless that authority prohibits it.
- It does not stop anyone citing facts such as an application number, a filing date or a grant. Copyright protects expression, not facts.
- It does not alter the status of the Office's own editorial content. IP Lex summaries and manuals are Government works that the exception does not reach, as before.
- It does not say how a database as a whole is protected. India has no separate database right, so any protection rests on copyright in an original compilation, on contract and website terms, and on other statutes.
How the US, Europe and the UK compare
United States. Under 17 U.S.C. § 105, copyright protection is not available for any work of the US Government. In Georgia v Public.Resource.Org (2020), the Supreme Court held that annotations made for an arm of a state legislature were not copyrightable. In Feist v Rural Telephone (1991), it held that facts are free and a compilation needs original selection or arrangement. USPTO data is therefore widely reused, subject to the USPTO's own access rules.
European Union. The Database Directive, 96/9/EC, gives a separate right to a database maker. It applies where there was substantial investment in obtaining, verifying or presenting the contents. The Open Data Directive, (EU) 2019/1024, encourages reuse of public sector information. Article 1(6) provides that public sector bodies shall not use the database right to prevent or restrict reuse beyond the Directive's limits.
United Kingdom. Material produced by the Crown carries Crown copyright under section 163 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Much of it, including most government data, is released under the Open Government Licence, which permits commercial reuse with attribution. The UK also keeps a database right.
Internationally. Article 2(4) of the Berne Convention leaves each country to decide how far official legislative, administrative and legal texts are protected. India's answer is the targeted exception in Section 52(1)(q), not a general public domain rule.
Practical steps
- Legal tech and AI providers should map each IP India source they use. Separate court and tribunal judgments and orders, which Section 52(1)(q) covers, from office manuals, summaries and databases, which it does not.
- Providers should stop bulk scraping or mirroring of IP India resources for commercial products. Remove the IP India and IP Lex names and logo from any branding.
- Providers should rebuild datasets from primary court and tribunal orders where possible, and record the source of each document.
- Law firms may continue to quote and cite decisions in advice, articles and filings. Acknowledge the source and avoid any suggestion of official endorsement.
- Anyone unsure should seek written permission from the Office before commercial use, and keep that permission on file.
For the wider picture, see our guide to the types of intellectual property protection and our note on AI training and copyright in the EU.
Frequently asked questions
Are government works copyrighted in India?
Yes. Works made or published under the control of the Government, a Legislature or a court are Government works. Copyright in a published Government work lasts 60 years from the year after first publication. Section 52(1)(q) allows reproduction of specific texts such as Official Gazette matter and judgments.
Can I republish court judgments in India?
Yes, unless the court or tribunal has prohibited reproduction. Editorial additions by a publisher, such as paragraph numbering, may be protected under Eastern Book Company v D.B. Modak.
Can I use IP India data in a commercial product?
Not by copying, scraping or republishing IP India resources for commercial gain, according to the CGPDTM notice of 10 November 2026. Facts remain free to use. Judgments may be reproduced under Section 52(1)(q) unless the court prohibits it.