+91-80-26860424 / 34

Call Us Today

LinkedIn

Search
 

Media and Entertainment Law

BananaIP Counsels > Media and Entertainment Law (Page 26)

Royalties for Singers – Delhi High Court passes a favorable order

This image depicts a Court Gavel. This image is relevant as the article deals with the decision delivered by Delhi High Court regarding Royalties to singers. Click on this Image for more Information.

For all of us waiting to hear of development in the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012, yes, we have some news for you. It is not for Lyricists, or for Music Composers, but for Singers this time! The Indian Singers Rights Association (ISRA) has obtained a favourable order against one of the Delhi based clubs, Night Fever Club & Lounge, that has been playing songs and not paying Singers their due. The ISRA filed a suit against this lounge before the Delhi High Court on December 18, 2014 and have been successful in procuring a favourable order. The copy of the order states that the...

Continue reading

Emancipation of Sherlock Holmes & Dr. Watson

The image is from the BBC television show depicting Sherlock Holmes and John Watson. The post is about the expiry of copyright over Sherlock Holmes which is now in Public Domain. Click on the image to read post.

One might ask, how do 127-year-old immortal characters of Sherlock Holmes & Dr. Watson achieve emancipation? The answer is simple: Sherlock’s free for all now, as a direct result of Leslie Klinger v. Conan Doyle Estate Ltd[i]. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, US, vide Order dated June 16, 2014, clarified that the characters of the Sherlockean World, creations of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, are in the public domain now, as their copyright expired as early as 1997. With the exception of 10 Sherlock stories written between 1923 and 1927, the copyright has expired on all other 46 stories and...

Continue reading

Reversion of Assignments & Licenses – Part III: Notes on Copyright Amendment, 2012

The image has a sheet of paper with text stating "Copyright License Agreement". The post contains notes relevant to Copyright Amendment Act 2012. Click on image to view post.

The Copyright Amendment brought in a few important changes with respect to mode of assignment of works. Not exercising due care with these provisions might result in reversion of rights. Thankfully, some of these changes were all encompassing and not limited only to authors or owners of works for films.

Relevant provisions of Section 19 read as follows:

“19. Mode of assignment. …

(4) Where the assignee does not exercise the rights assigned to him under any of the other sub-sections of this section within a period of one year from the date of assignment, the assignment in respect of such rights shall be deemed to have lapsed after the expiry of the said period unless otherwise specified in the assignment.

Assignment & Royalty – Part II: Notes on Copyright Amendment, 2012

The image has a huge copyright sign at the center of it. The post is about copyright assignment. Click on image to view post.

One of the primary purposes of the Copyright Amendment in 2012 was to ensure that authors get their well deserved consideration. The focus was primarily on authors, who create works for feature films. Other authors, unfortunately, received little or no attention. After making sure that producers do not take away ownership rights by signing ‘work for hire’ engagements, the amendment made changes to provisions with respect to assignment in Section 18.

The first provision in Section 18, the subject of this post, reads as follows:

“18. Assignment of copyright. (1) The owner of the copyright in an existing work or the prospective owner of the copyright in a future work may assign to any person the copyright either wholly or partially and either generally or subject to limitations and either for the whole term of the copyright or any part thereof: Provided that in the case of the assignment of copyright in any future work, the assignment shall take effect only when the work comes into existence.

Provided further that no such assignment shall be applied to any medium or mode of exploitation of the work which did not exist or was not in commercial use at the time when the assignment was made, unless the assignment specifically referred to such medium or mode of exploitation of the work:

An Overview of Music Licensing – Part 1

This Image depicts the word art of Petrucci's Music Company. This Image is relevant as the article deals with the Music Licensing. Click on this Image for more Information.

Music licensing means transfer of exclusive or non – exclusive rights to use a piece of music which sometimes may be a complete song, a snippet of a song or an entire album or an entire repertoire for a set period of time, for a fee. Music licensing deals can take several forms, but generally all deals dictate the presence of a licensing fee, an expiration date of the licensing agreement, and terms specifying where and how the licensee can use the licensed music.

These licenses are taken by various commercial entities such as television broadcasting organisations, radio stations, digital platforms, restaurants, bars, discotheques etc. In the olden days, authors, composers and copyright owners collected performing right royalties as a norm for operas and similar stage works; but for shorter works which were often performed publicly, thousands of times a day, at all sorts of entertainment programs around the world, some special method of tracking had to be devised.

In practice, it would be intolerably troublesome and costly, if not wholly impractical, to obtain permission to perform copyrighted music in public, and of course it would be impossible for most copyright-owners to deal adequately with such requests of permission. In order to resolve this problem, formation of collective management organizations was introduced under the Berne and Rome conventions. Collective Management Organizations, in some jurisdictions, are called Performing Right Societies or Copyright Societies. By now, in most countries, performing societies have been established.

‘Fair Use’ – Professors versus Publishers

The image displays Fair Use with the aid of clip art.

  This post was first published on   In a recent judgment, A U.S. Court ruled in favor of Georgia State University’s professors’ using excerpts of published works for the purpose of education. The case, primarily rules in favor of the professors and the university on the issue of Copyright Infringement. The case involved Georgia State University on the defending side and three major publishing companies namely, Cambridge University Press, Oxford University Press and SAGE publications as the plaintiffs who had collectively filed around 74 copyright infringement claims against the University. The respected Judge through a 350-page order dealt with each claim individually going into...

Continue reading

Entertainment Law – Presentation by Nishant Kewalramani

This presentation covers Copyright Amendment Bill 2011, the importance of registering copyright and provides an insight into copyright infringement in the entertainment industry. Please see the document embedded below for more details.   [slideshare id=35151689&doc=91808878-recent-developments-in-entertainment-law-140526235335-phpapp01]   ...

Continue reading

Indian Performing Rights Society v. Eastern Indian Motion Pictures Ltd.

Citation AIR1977 SC1443, (1977)2 SCC820, [1977]3 SCR206 Facts: This is a dispute that broke out in a matter involving rights over Indian literary and music works for which the copyright subsides in India. Parties to the dispute where the Indian performing right society and the cinematograph exhibitors association of India. IPRS incorporated on 23/08/1969 in the state of Maharashtra governed by copyright Act 1957 has the authority for issuing licenses for performance in public of all existing future Indian literary and musical works for which the copyright subsides in India and is a company limited by guarantee for the purpose of granting license...

Continue reading
Speak with an IP Expert Today
close slider
css.php