Poorna’s project explores how the structure of tangible property can be transposed to copyright to achieve a balance between ownership and user rights. At its core, Poorna’s research examines how private law principles enable better conceptualisation of copyright law. She will pursue an historical and comparative analysis of property and copyright law in various common law jurisdictions.
Poorna completed her DPhil at the Law Faculty at Oxford in 2017 on implied licences in copyright law supervised by Professor Graeme Dinwoodie. Over the last few years, Poorna has taught several core private law subjects such as Land Law, Contract Law and Tort Law at various colleges in Oxford and Copyright Law at the Law Faculty.
Poorna is affiliated to the Queen's College, Oxford as an Extraordinary Junior Research Fellow. She is also an Academic Member of the Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre.
Poorna obtained her undergraduate law degree from National Law School of India University and her LLM from SOAS, University of London. Before embarking on her DPhil, Poorna practised intellectual property law in Hong Kong and was a litigator in India.
- In the copyright context, courts have applied proprietary estoppel to assess whether an implied bare copyright licence has become irrevocable. In doing so, courts have derived principles of proprietary estoppel developed in land law. However, in the land law context, in the last few decades, courts have moved towards a unified approach to proprietary estoppel, resulting in a loss of nuance. In particular, the acquiescence-strand of proprietary estoppel has fallen been neglected in this process of unification. This article argues that in order to do justice in copyright cases, the acquiescence-strand of proprietary estoppel must be resurrected, and the trend in land law towards a unified approach must be reversed, bringing more nuance into the assessment of proprietary estoppel in copyright cases.In the UK, all works need to be recorded in some manner for copyright to subsist. While scholars acknowledge that this requirement exists, its teleological significance is not appreciated. This article argues that the need for record is a fundamental requirement in conceptualising copyright as a property right, which gives the content of copyright subject matter a form, demarcating its boundaries and triggering property protection. It analyses the rules governing form, which are sometimes expressly and sometimes impliedly stated in the statute, but not necessarily understood independently from other requirements of copyright subsistence. It goes on to explain why the need for form exists at all and why it exists as a precondition to copyright subsistence, unlike authors’ rights regimes, going on to argue that the need for form is compatible with EU law.
Journal Article (8)
Presentation/Conference contribution (7)
Case Note (1)
Land Law, Personal Property Law, Contract Law, Copyright Law and Intellectaul Property Law in general.