Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{186440,
        author = {Imran Khan A and Gowtham M},
        title = {DATABASE PROTECTION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY INDIA VS the EUROPEAN UNION},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2025},
        volume = {12},
        number = {6},
        pages = {1090-1097},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=186440},
        abstract = {Databases, as structured compilations of information, are vital commercial assets requiring substantial investment in their creation, maintenance, and organization. The legal protection of databases varies globally, primarily between copyright-based and sui generis models. This study provides a comparative analysis of database protection in India and the European Union (EU), focusing on their legislative frameworks, judicial interpretations, and policy approaches. While India relies on general copyright principles under the Copyright Act, 1957 and limited provisions in the Information Technology Act, 2000, the EU offers comprehensive dual protection through the Database Directive (1996), which grants both copyright protection for original databases and sui generis rights for databases involving substantial investment. Indian courts continue to follow the “sweat of the brow” doctrine, protecting databases as literary works where skill and labour are demonstrated, but the absence of a dedicated database law creates ambiguity, especially for non-original compilations. Conversely, the EU’s sui generis right recognizes the value of investment independent of originality, providing robust commercial protection but raising concerns about public access and information monopolies. The study concludes that India needs a separate, well-defined legal framework for database protection — one that balances investment incentives with public interest, ensures fair use, and prevents perpetual monopolies over factual information. Recommendations include a limited-term sui generis right, mandatory registration, clear exceptions for research and education, and provisions for compulsory licensing to maintain the free flow of information.},
        keywords = {},
        month = {November},
        }