2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 1086
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
MANISH PITALE, J
Indian Performing Right Society Limited – Appellant
Versus
Rajasthan Patrika Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.9452 OF 2022 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO.193 OF 2022 | INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1213 OF 2022 IN COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO.84 OF 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Ravi Kadam, Mr. Ashish Kamat, Mr. Rohan Kadam, Mr. Himanshu Bagai, Mr. Thomas George, Ms. Tanvi Sinha, Mr. Navankur Pathak, Ms. Neeti Nihal, Ms. Roma Liya, Saikrishna and Associates
For the Respondents: Mr. Abhishek Malhotra, Ms. Sapna Chaurasia, Mr. Darshit Jain, TMT Law Practice, Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, Dr. Virendra Tulzapurkar, Alpha Chambers.
The amendments to the Copyright Act of 2012 significantly altered the legal landscape regarding the rights of authors to claim royalties for their works utilized in sound recordings communicated to the public.
Headnote:(A) Copyright Act, 1957 - Amendments effective from 21.06.2012 - Rights of authors of original works modified, allowing them to claim royalties under specific circumstances. The amendments introduce independent rights for authors, impacting previous judicial interpretations on copyright ownership. (Paras 1, 17, 44-56)
(B) The court affirmed that communication of sound recordings constitutes utilization of underlying literary and musical works, allowing the plaintiff to claim royalties. (Paras 18, 30)
(C) The rights of authors outlined in the amendments are paramount, restricting the defendants' claims under prior judicial interpretations regarding sound recordings. (Paras 3, 41)
Facts of the case:
The Indian Performing Right Society Limited sought interim relief against FM radio broadcasters for unauthorized use of their repertoire, claiming the amendments to the Copyright Act clarified and expanded authors' rights to receive royalties. (Paras 1-3)
Findings of Court:
The plaintiff established a strong prima facie case that the amendments significantly changed the landscape for copyright entitlements, necessitating interim injunctions for unauthorized public performance of authors' works. (Paras 66-70)
Issues: Whether amendments to the Copyright Act conferred new substantive rights to authors of original works and if previous court interpretations still apply. (Paras 18, 36)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the 2012 amendments created substantive rights for authors, thus altering the legal interpretation of their entitlements to royalties when their works are broadcast. (Paras 50-55)
Result: Interim orders were granted in favor of the plaintiff, requiring the defendants to pay royalties for utilizing the works in their broadcasts.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. iprs claims rights under amended copyright act. (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. defendants argue amendments are clarificatory. (Para 2 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. court reviews prior case law on copyright. (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. court acknowledges potential changes from amendments. (Para 24 , 25 , 27) |
| 5. iprs has strong prima facie case for interim relief. (Para 28 , 60) |
| 6. amendment effects analyzed regarding authors' rights. (Para 36 , 39 , 44) |
| 7. court grants interim reliefs to iprs. (Para 66 , 67 , 70) |
JUDGEMENT :
. The plaintiff - Indian Performing Right Society Limited (IPRS) has approached this Court seeking interim reliefs against the defendants in these suits, primarily on the ground that amendments brought into effect from 21.06.2012 in the Copyright Act , 1957, have completely changed the legal framework concerning the rights of authors of original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works. It is the case of the plaintiff – IPRS, that being a society registered under the provisions of the Copyright Act , it is espousing the cause of such authors of original works, who were earlier deprived of their rightful claims, but now they have become entitled to claim royalties on each occasion that their original works are utilized and in the facts of the present cases, on each occasion when a sound recording is communicated to the public by the defendants. It is relevant to mention here that the defendants are companies engaged in the business of operating FM Radio Broadcast Channels. The plaintiff - IPRS claims that the amendments brought into effect from 21.06.2012 in the Copyright Act have the effect of calling upon the Court to consider granting interim reliefs, without being influenced by a series of judgements and orders of the Supreme Court and various High Courts, concerning identical claims raised prior to the amendment of the Copyright Act .
2. The defendants, on the other hand, submit that the amendments are merely clarificatory in nature, re-enforcing the well settled position of law. It is specifically submitted that Sections 13 and 14 of the Copyright Act pertaining to ‘works in which copyright subsists’ and ‘meaning of copyright’ have not been amended in the year 2012, thereby indicating that amendments in other provisions would not grant any new substantive right to the authors of the original works, whose cause the plaintiff - IPRS claims to espouse.
3. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, it would be appropriate to refer to the facts in brief.
FACTS IN BRIEF
4. The plaintiff - IPRS was incorporated as a company in the year 1969, with the object of protecting and enforcing rights, interests and privileges of authors, composers and publishers, who were its members, particularly in relation to the literary and musical works. The defendant in Commercial IP Suit No.193 of 2022 i.e. Rajasthan Patrika Private Limited was incorporated as a private limited company in the year 1974. It is engaged in the business of operating FM Radio Broadcast Channels, including the channel ‘Radio Tadka’.
5. In the year 1996, the plaintiff - IPRS was granted a certificate of registration under Section 33 of the Copyright Act by the Registrar of Copyrights, authorizing it to carry on copyright business in literary and musical works. In the year 1999, the defendant in Commercial IP Suit No.84 of 2022 i.e. Music Broadcast Private Limited was incorporated as a company. It is engaged in the business of operating FM Radio Broadcast Channels, including the channel ‘Radio City FM’. The said defendant Music Broadcast Private Limited entered into a licence agreement with the plaintiff - IPRS on 11.06.2001 for utilization of the repertoire of literary and musical works of the plaintiff as a part of its FM radio broadcast from the radio station ‘Radio City FM’. Similarly, the defendant - Rajasthan Patrika Private Limited also entered into such agreement on 17.07.2006 with the plaintiff - IPRS for broadcasting from the radio station ‘Radio Ta