Dear Aditya,We’re all trying to make sense of a badly thguoht out and drafted provision. I can appreciate where you’re coming from. However, a court is likely to interpret this in accordance with its plain reading.To me, this provision seems to suggest that if X could have exercised his right (copyright) over an intermediary “Y”, then nothing in the IT Act shall detract from that position. You state that “The distinction I am trying to make is between ‘the right to exercise a right (i.e the jurisdictional right’ and ‘substantive rights under the Copyright Act’. “Assuming X had the substantive right under the copyright act, then how is the IT Act implicating the “jurisdictional right”. For if the IT Act does not implicate the jurisdictional right, there is no reason to have a savings provision in section 81?
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.