Summary
The Kerala High Court in Matrubhumi Printing and Publishing Ltd v. IPRS addressed the issue of whether broadcasting sound recordings from cinematograph films on FM radio infringes the copyright of composers or lyricists. The court held that, unless a contract states otherwise, the producer or owner of a film becomes the author of the sound recording once rights are assigned by the composer or lyricist. The decision set aside injunctions against Matrubhumi and Malayalam Manorama, clarifying that neither the composers nor IPRS could restrain their FM broadcasts. The judgment also highlighted the need for legislative reform to better protect the rights of musicians and lyricists in India.
FAO. No. 82 of 2009, Kerala High Court, decided by Justice M.N. Krishnan
FACTS
The Petitioner no 1, Matrubhumi Printing and Publishing Ltd who operates a licensed Radio Station “Club FM 94.3” in parts of Kerala has a license from the Phonographic Performance Limited (PPL) to broadcast sound recordings. Indian Performing Rights Society (IPRS), the defendant, a society of composers, lyricists etc which grants licenses with respect to musical and literary works threatened to initiate action against Matrubhumi as a license to broadcast was not sought from them. Thereby an interim injunction is sought to restrain IPRS from proceeding in that regard and IPRS is seeking injunction for restraining further broadcasts. Malayalam Manorama Co. Ltd, Petitioner No. 2, who also broadcasts sound recordings for FM radio stations, had similar issues with IPRS.
HISTORY
The trial court injuncted Matrubhumi & Malayalam Manorama (by seperate judgments) from broadcasting sound recordings in their FM Radio stations and hence the aggrieved appealed.
ISSUE
Whether a cinematograph film from which a sound recording is taken and broadcasted in FM Radio amounts to any breach of copyright of the composer or lyricists?
RULE
Sec 13(4) of Copyright Act, 1957 states that copyright in a cinematograph film or sound recording does not affect the separate copyright of the work. Section 14(1)(c) (ii) states in the case of a cinematograph film to cause the film, in so far as it consists of visual images, to be seen in public and in so far as it consists of sounds, to be heard in public.
The Supreme court in IPR Society v. EIMP Association(AIR 1977 SC 1443) held that the owner of the film or the producer of the film becomes the author& is absolutely entitled to copyright of the sound recording embodied in a cinematograph film and therefore there remains no right with the composer or the lyricist unless a contract to contrary is in place.
HELD
Neither the composers/lyricists etc nor IPRS can restrain Matrubhumi or Malayalam Manorama from broadcasting a sound recording embodied in a film because neither can claim copyright on a sound recording once it has been sold to the producer or owner of the film, unless otherwise provided in a contract.
ANALYSIS
The owner/producer of a cinematograph film becomes the first author entitled to absolute right of a sound recording embodied in the film when (a) the copyright has been bought from the lyricist, composer etc and (b) there exists no contract to the contrary. Once the author of a lyric/musical work sells his copyright and authorizes the producer to incorporate his sound recording in the film, then upon completion of the film the producer acquires copyright in the work by virtue of Sec 14(1)(C ) of the Act. This copyright vests in him an exclusive right to perform the work in public.
Therefore setting aside of injunction against Matrubhumi & Malayalam Manorama seems justified as the court identified the author of a sound recording in a cinematograph film to be the producer or owner of film and not the composer/lyricist. Thus Matrubhumi and Malayalam Manorama have not infringed the copyright of the composer/lyricist by broadcasts in their FM stations.
Authored by: Ms. Nisha Kurian