Bombay High Court quashes circular exempting music played at weddings from copyright action

The Bombay High Court bench at Goa recently struck down a circular issued by the Government of Goa on January 30, 2024, which exempted music played at weddings from copyright infringement action under the Copyright Act [PPL v. State of Goa]. .The decision came in response to a writ petition filed by Phonographic Performance Limited (PPL), which challenged the circular on the grounds that it infringed upon their rights as copyright owners to initiate proceedings for infringement when sound recordings are played at wedding events.PPL's challenge was joined by Sonotek Cassettes Company, who raised similar concerns against the circular..The bench comprising Justice MS Karnik and Justice Valmiki Menezes held that the circular exceeded the scope of Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act. This section provides exceptions for the performance of sound recordings during bonafide religious ceremonies but the circular improperly introduced terms such as "wedding," which are not included in the statutory language. The court emphasized that what constitutes a bonafide religious ceremony must be determined on a case-by-case basis.."As to what is a bonafide religious ceremony is a question of fact. Then again what constitutes ‘other social festivities associated with marriage’ will depend upon the facts of each case. Instructing field units to take strict action against any hotel or copyright society raising such illegal demands of royalties or any fees for the performance of musical works, in our opinion, tends to interfere with the enforcement mechanism provided in the Act," the order said..Phonographic Performance Limited is a prominent organisation registered under the Companies Act, 1956, providing public performance rights for sound recordings. With rights to over 40 lakh sound recordings through assignments from various music labels, PPL plays a crucial role in licensing music for public performances, thereby ensuring that copyright holders receive royalties for their work..During the hearing, PPL, represented by Senior Advocate Nitin Sardessai, contended that the State's Home Ministry lacked the jurisdiction to interpret copyright law and that the circular unlawfully expanded the scope of Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act. .The petitioner argued that the circular impedes its rights to initiate legal proceedings against copyright infringement, suggesting it could deter legitimate royalty collections. PPL referenced precedents from the Punjab and Haryana High Court and asserted that public notices cannot alter statutory rights under the Copyright Act..In response, the Additional Government Advocate Deep Shirodkar defended the circular, stating it was issued under the State Government's executive powers to prevent misuse of police authority regarding copyright infringement. .He argued that the circular was aimed at informing the public and police about statutory provisions, particularly in light of complaints related to copyright enforcement. He maintained that it does not restrict civil or criminal remedies for copyright infringement but merely provides guidance and was issued in consonance with a Central government directive regarding the same. .The Court agreed with the arguments of the petitioner. “According to us, the circular puts fetters on the copyright societies from exercising their rights under the Copyright Act. The circular saying that insistence by certain organisations, hotels for getting permission from the copyright society for performance of musical works, communication to the public sound recording is in violation of Section 52(1)(za), according to us, interferes with the mechanism provided under the Act for exercise or enforcing rights of copyright societies under the Copyright Act,” the Court said. .Senior Advocate Nitin Sardessai with advocates Pulkit Bandodkar, Ankur Sangal, Sucheta Roy, Tarun Rebello, S Sardessai and Ankit Arvin appeared for PPL.Senior Advocate SS Kantak with advocates Pulkit Bandodkar, Ankur Sangal, Saicha Dessai and Simoes Kher appeared for Sonotek Cassettes Company.Additional Government Advocate Deep Shirodkar appeared for State of Goa.Advocates YV Nadkarni, Shailesh Redkar and S Khadilkar for Novex Communications Private Limited.[Read Judgment]