Hotels should obtain copyright licence for music played through cable TV in rooms: Calcutta High Court

Hotels providing cable television facility in their rooms cannot avoid paying copyright royalties for literary and musical works merely because the cable operator has obtained a licence from the copyright holder, the Calcutta High Court recently held.

In a judgment delivered on August 4, a Bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md Shabbar Rashidi held that providing cable television in hotel rooms is a commercial amenity and amounts to “communication to the public” under the Copyright Act, 1957.

The Court made the ruling while allowing an appeal filed by the Indian Performing Right Society Limited (IPRS) against Hotel Appolo & Tours Private Limited.

“The actions on the part of the respondent surely fell within the meaning of ‘commercial exploitation’ of the literary and musical works owned by the members of the appellant,” the Court said.

IPRS sued the hotel claiming that copyrighted literary and musical works belonging to its members were being communicated to guests through television sets installed in hotel rooms without licence or payment of royalty.

IPRS had approached the District Judge at Darjeeling in 2023 seeking to restrain the hotel from using its copyrighted works without a licence. After the court refused interim relief in September 2024, IPRS moved the High Court in appeal.

The hotel argued that it has already paid subscription charges to the cable operator, which held the necessary broadcast rights. Therefore, it contended that it could not be required to pay IPRS separately.

The High Court rejected the argument.

It referred to Section 2(i) of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, which defines a subscriber as someone receiving cable television signals at a specified place “without further transmitting it to any other person”.

The Court held that hotel guests could not be considered subscribers within the meaning of this provision.

“The same could not have been transmitted as a commercial amenity directed to be used by ‘any other person’ other than the subscriber. We are not in a position to accept that the guests staying in hotel rooms of the respondent are ‘subscribers’,” the judgment said.

The Court also relied on Section 2(ff) of the Copyright Act, which specifically provides that communication through cable or satellite to more than one household or place of residence, including residential rooms of hotels and hostels, amounts to communication to the public.

Significantly, it observed that it did not matter that the hotel did not separately charge its guests for television services.

“May be the respondent was not charging for such services separately but such services were surely additional facilities to the guests which had the effect of adding commercial value to the business of the respondent,” the Court said.

It further noted that Section 52(1)(k), which exempts certain uses of copyrighted recordings in residential premises, specifically excludes hotels and similar commercial establishments.

The High Court consequently overturned the September 2024 order of the District Judge which had refused temporary injunction to IPRS.

The Court found that IPRS had established a strong prima facie case and held that the unauthorised use would cause it irreparable loss. It, therefore, restrained the hotel from communicating or publicly performing works from the IPRS repertoire without a licence and payment of the applicable statutory royalty.

IPRS was represented by Advocates Soumya Roychowdhury, Samina Khanum, Gauti Khanna and Riddhima Sharma.

Senior Advocate Probal Kumar Mukherjee along with advocates Suhrid Sur and S Roy represented the hotel.

[Read Judgment]