We need to recognise that different forms of cultural creations have a different relation to the act of copying. Rajesh Mehar in his history of Indian rock music has shown us that the act of copying was central to the way people learnt music, and it may be a better idea to rethink the one-size-fits-all approach that informs copyright law.

At different points in her life, Helen Keller was accused of plagiarism. What people ignored is that the way Helen Keller learnt language and read was very different from an ordinary reader’s, and she learnt not from sound and sight but from touch.

In her defence she said, “Sometimes I think I ought to stop writing altogether, since I cannot tell surely which of my ideas are borrowed feathers, except for those which I gather from books in raised print.”

In our enthusiasm to protect the creator and ensure that he gets his just rewards, let’s not forget that the sense of touch is not limited to the hand, but extends to our eyes and ears. It is only natural that when we create something, it will be influenced by things we have read, heard or seen, even if they are not our property. Walter Benjamin describes this form of mimicry as a form of learning as a “sensuous similarity”, a right to copy, which should be as jealously guarded as copyright.

The writer, a lawyer and cultural theorist, co-founded the Alternative Law Forum in Bangalore

... contd.