Bombay High Court orders Radio City, FM Tadka to pay royalties before using copyrighted music

The Bombay High Court on Friday held that the Indian Performing Right Society (IPRS) was entitled to raise claims for royalties from companies owning radio channels like FM Tadka and Radio City. [Indian Performing Right Society Limited v. Rajasthan Patrika Ltd. and Anr].Justice Manish Pitale held that the amended Copyright Act indicated that IPRS was entitled to ask for interim relief for the benefit of its members, who are authors of literary and musical works utilized in cinematograph films and sound recordings. “The IPRS can demand royalties in terms of the quantum already determined in proceedings initiated in that regard and as per the rates presently in vogue as per orders passed in such proceedings, which may be revised in accordance with law during the pendency of the present suit,” the order stated..The Court clarified that the FM channels would be restrained from using the copyrighted music if they fail to pay the royalties to IPRS within six weeks of receiving such communication..The order was passed in a petition filed by IPRS seeking enforcement of the 2012 amendments to the Copyright Act concerning the rights of authors of original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works.The amendments prohibit authors themselves from assigning or waiving their right to receive royalties for utilization of their works in cinematograph films and sound recordings.IPRS stated that authors of original works, who were earlier deprived of their rightful claims, had become entitled to claim royalties on each occasion that their original works are utilized. In the present case, it was argued that the authors of original works were entitled to royalties on each occasion a sound recording was communicated to the public by the radio channels. The defendant companies, Rajasthan Patrika and Music Broadcast Limited, were engaged in the business of operating FM Tadka and Radio City respectively. They claimed that the amendments did not grant any new substantive right to the authors of original works. .The Court concluded that IPRS was justified in claiming interim relief due to changes to the Copyright Act. It agreed with IPRS’ argument that the addition of provisos to Sections 17 and 18 (owner and assignment of copyright) brought about a change leading to recognition of additional rights in favour of authors of original literary and musical works. “There is substance in the contention raised on behalf of IPRS that in a given situation, even a proviso can give rise to a substantive right in favour of a party,” the order stated. .Senior Advocates Ravi Kadam, Janak Dwarkadas and Ashish Kamat with Advocates Rohan Kadam, Himanshu Bagai, Thomas George, Tanvi Sinha, Navankur Pathak, Neeti Nihal and Roma Liya briefed by Saikrishna and Associates appeared for IPRS. Advocates Abhishek Malhotra, Sapna Chaurasia and Darshit Jain briefed by TMT Law Practice appaared for Rajasthan Patrika. Senior Advocate Virendra Tulzapurkar with Advocates Hiren Kamod and Rahul Jain briefed by Alpha Chambers appeared for Music Broadcast. .[Read order]