IP&IT Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v. Eastern India Molion pictures association (AIR1977 SC 1443).

 

Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v. Eastern India Motion Pictures Association (AIR 1977 SC 1443)

Facts of the Case:

The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. (IPRS), a copyright society, was established to protect the interests of composers, lyricists, and music publishers. The IPRS claimed that when cinematograph films were exhibited in cinema halls, the underlying musical works and lyrics were being publicly performed. It argued that such performances required a separate license and royalty payments to the copyright owners.

On the other hand, the Eastern India Motion Pictures Association (EIMPA), representing film producers and distributors, contended that once a producer lawfully acquired the rights to a musical work and incorporated it into a film, no separate license or payment was required for exhibition in theatres.

Issue Before the Supreme Court:

The main question was whether the public exhibition of a cinematograph film, which included pre-recorded musical works, constituted a separate public performance requiring additional copyright permission and royalty payments under the Copyright Act, 1957.

Judgment of the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court ruled against the Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. and held that:

1. Exhaustion of Rights: When a musical work is incorporated into a cinematograph film with proper authorization, the copyright in the musical work merges with the film's copyright. The copyright holder of the film then controls its exhibition, and no separate performance rights remain for the musical work in the context of the film.

2. Public Performance Distinction: The Court distinguished between an independent public performance of a musical work (e.g., a live orchestra or a radio broadcast) and the exhibition of a film containing the musical work. It ruled that exhibiting a film in a cinema hall is not a separate public performance of the underlying musical work that requires additional licensing.

3. Producer’s Exclusive Rights: Once a producer lawfully acquires rights over a musical composition and incorporates it into a cinematograph film, they obtain the exclusive right to publicly exhibit the film, which includes the incorporated musical work. The exhibition of the film does not infringe on the separate performance rights of the music composer or lyricist.

Law Laid Down by the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court established a significant principle in Indian copyright law:

• No separate public performance rights exist for a musical work once it has been incorporated into a cinematograph film and lawfully acquired by the producer.
• The doctrine of exhaustion applies, meaning that once the work is used lawfully in a film, the author of the musical work cannot claim further royalty for its public exhibition.
• This ruling ensured that film producers do not have to take additional permissions from music composers or lyricists for public screenings of films.

Impact of the Judgment on Intellectual Property Law:

• Clarified the Rights of Copyright Owners: It provided clarity on the scope of copyright ownership in cinematograph films and how it affects music composers and lyricists.
• Strengthened the Film Industry: It ensured that film producers could freely exhibit films without being burdened by additional copyright claims for music used in the film.
• Guided Amendments to the Copyright Act, 1957: Subsequent amendments to Indian copyright law considered the impact of this judgment, particularly in balancing the rights of composers and producers.

This landmark case remains a foundational ruling in Indian Intellectual Property Law and continues to influence copyright disputes, especially concerning music in films and digital media.