Film creators maintain entitlement to royalty payments when their works are broadcast on radio stations, as affirmed by the Bombay High Court

In a groundbreaking decision on April 28, 2023, the Bombay High Court ruled that authors, composers, and other creators of original literary or musical works can claim royalties when their works are broadcast by FM Radio channels. This decision marks a significant shift in the interpretation of the Copyright Act, as it is the first time that the court has recognized the rights of authors and musicians to collect royalties for songs that form part of a cinematography work if such songs are broadcasted or communicated to the public by any mode other than cinema in a cinema hall.

The court's decision was based on the 2012 amendment to the Copyright Act, which changes the position of law enunciated by the Supreme Court in the IPRS case. The amendment clarifies that the right of authors, music composers, etc. to claim royalties remains unaffected in case of utilization of their works in the case of a cinematograph film when it is communicated to the public other than in a cinema hall, as indicated by sub-sections (9) and (10) of Section 19 of the Copyright Act.

The primary contention of the defendants, various FM Radio channels that broadcast film songs belonging to the Indian Performing Rights Society Limited (IPRS)'s members, is that the 2012 amendments are clarifactory in nature and do not grant any new substantive rights to IPRS. However, the court held that depending on the nature of the proviso and the interplay of various provisions of the statute, even a proviso can give rise to a substantive right in favor of a party.

Justice Manish Pitale, who presided over the case, used statements of objects and reasons and parliamentary committee reports as aids to interpretation. The court's decision emphasizes that the right of authors, music composers, etc. to claim royalties remains unaffected in case of utilization of their works in the case of a cinematograph film when it is communicated to the public other than in a cinema hall.

The court's decision also establishes that a communication to the public of a sound recording that forms a part of the cinematograph film from radio stations is indeed a form of communication other than communication in a cinema hall. As a result, the exclusive right of the defendants under Section 14(e)(iii) of the Copyright Act to communicate the sound recording to the public is subjected to the right to collect royalties now available to the authors of such literary and musical works.

In response to IPRS's claim that amendments to the Copyright Act in 2012 entitle its members to royalty on each occasion a sound recording is communicated to the public by the defendants, the court granted an interim injunction and directed payment of royalties, at the rates prescribed, to the plaintiff.

The court's decision is a significant victory for IPRS, an organization that protects and enforces rights, interests, and privileges of authors, composers, and publishers. This decision is expected to have far-reaching implications for the music industry, as it establishes a new precedent for the recognition of authors' and musicians' rights in the digital age. The identity of the author who played a role in the 2023 Bombay High Court judgment recognizing the rights of authors and music composers to levy fees for songs included in a film and broadcast by radio stations was not specified in publicly available sources.

Film creators maintain entitlement to royalty payments when their works are broadcast on radio stations, as affirmed by the Bombay High Court