“Sweat Of The Brow” is one of the well known doctrines in Copyright Law. The doctrine protects factual compilations. The origin of this doctrine cannot be acknowledged, but through study this is clear that this doctrine is the result of misinterpretation of earlier statutes. The rationale behind this doctrine was to award the person who expended his sweat and effort in compiling the facts. No one can misuse and take a gain out of it. The principle of Sweat of the brow doctrine can also be stated in the form that one is not at liberty to avail himself of the labour which the other has been at for the purposes of producing his work that is, in fact, merely to take away the result of another mans labour or in other words, his intellectual property. But Copyright Act protects original and creative works. And thus this doctrine is in conflict with the core principle of the Copyright Act. It has led to confusion in order to determine the boundaries of the concept of originality. With the ruling of the Feist Case(1991), this doctrine was totally negated. U.S. Copyright Act allows for the protection of "compilations," only when there is a "creative" or "original" act involved in such a compilation. The application of Feist case was made in case of directories, catalogues, charts , forms and judicial reports etc.. But in India, the lacuna is originality is not defined in the Act. India follows Sweat of the Brow doctrine. In the cases like Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak(2002), Indian judiciary showed a shift from the sweat of the brow doctrine. But still in case of database protection, this doctrine is practiced by the judiciary. The doctrine of sweat of the brow should be absolutely made void under copyright law, and Copyright Act should protect creativity and originality rather then labour and sweat. Clear and unambiguous clauses shall be added in the Act to describe ‘originality’ and ‘creativity’.