The article delves into a detailed comparative legal analysis of the requirement of fixation of an extempore speech and the test of originality for its record in English and Indian copyright jurisprudence. While a mere verbatim transcription or audio record of an extempore speech may entitle a reporter to claim copyright protection in UK, the same is not true in India. As per Indian law, the reporter is required to expend intellectual skill and judgement sufficient to lend minimal degree of creativity in substantively differentiating his written record from the speech. Indian Copyright law, unlike UK's law, also requires the reporter to obtain prior authorization from the speaker to transcribe or audio-record his speech. In essence therefore, the article highlights how English copyright law is much more lenient than its Indian counterpart in providing copyright protection even for a minimal effort on part of the reporter.