The Supreme Court upheld a Delhi High Court order stating that event organisers were not required to take licence from lyricists and musicians for playing songs in public after paying the fees to the sound recording company.
However, a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant clarified that after amendment to the Copyright Act since June 21, 2012, the assignment of the copyright in the work to make sound recording, which does not form part of any cinematograph film, would not affect the right of the author to claim an equal share of royalties or consideration payable for utilisation of such work in any form.
The court was hearing a plea by Indian Performing Rights Society Limited, a society of authors of literary work and composers of musical work, claiming that they were the first owners of copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957. They contested Synery Media Entertainments claim to play songs at the events, stating it would infringe upon their copyright, and licence given to sound recording company does not affect the rights of lyricist or the musician.
The court rejected the society's plea saying it is necessary to understand distinction between assignment of a copyright of a work and licence to use the work. "In the assignment, normally, ownership of the copyright of the work is transferred, but in the case of licence another person is allowed to use the work by the author," the court said.
However, a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant clarified that after amendment to the Copyright Act since June 21, 2012, the assignment of the copyright in the work to make sound recording, which does not form part of any cinematograph film, would not affect the right of the author to claim an equal share of royalties or consideration payable for utilisation of such work in any form.
The court was hearing a plea by Indian Performing Rights Society Limited, a society of authors of literary work and composers of musical work, claiming that they were the first owners of copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957. They contested Synery Media Entertainments claim to play songs at the events, stating it would infringe upon their copyright, and licence given to sound recording company does not affect the rights of lyricist or the musician.
The court rejected the society's plea saying it is necessary to understand distinction between assignment of a copyright of a work and licence to use the work. "In the assignment, normally, ownership of the copyright of the work is transferred, but in the case of licence another person is allowed to use the work by the author," the court said.
The Supreme Court upheld a Delhi High Court order stating that event organisers were not required to take licence from lyricists and musicians for playing songs in public after paying the fees to the sound recording company.
However, a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant clarified that after amendment to the Copyright Act since June 21, 2012, the assignment of the copyright in the work to make sound recording, which does not form part of any cinematograph film, would not affect the right of the author to claim an equal share of royalties or consideration payable for utilisation of such work in any form.
The court was hearing a plea by Indian Performing Rights Society Limited, a society of authors of literary work and composers of musical work, claiming that they were the first owners of copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957. They contested Synery Media Entertainment's claim to play songs at the events, stating it would infringe upon their copyright, and licence given to sound recording company does not affect the rights of lyricist or the musician.
The court rejected the society’s plea saying it is necessary to understand distinction between assignment of a copyright of a work and licence to use the work. "In the assignment, normally, ownership of the copyright of the work is transferred, but in the case of licence another person is allowed to use the work by the author,” the court said.
However, a bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Prafulla C Pant clarified that after amendment to the Copyright Act since June 21, 2012, the assignment of the copyright in the work to make sound recording, which does not form part of any cinematograph film, would not affect the right of the author to claim an equal share of royalties or consideration payable for utilisation of such work in any form.
The court was hearing a plea by Indian Performing Rights Society Limited, a society of authors of literary work and composers of musical work, claiming that they were the first owners of copyright under the Copyright Act, 1957. They contested Synery Media Entertainment's claim to play songs at the events, stating it would infringe upon their copyright, and licence given to sound recording company does not affect the rights of lyricist or the musician.
The court rejected the society’s plea saying it is necessary to understand distinction between assignment of a copyright of a work and licence to use the work. "In the assignment, normally, ownership of the copyright of the work is transferred, but in the case of licence another person is allowed to use the work by the author,” the court said.