Gramophone-era music contracts can’t decide digital song ownership: High Court

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that music contracts signed in the 1970s for gramophone records cannot automatically decide who owns a song on digital platforms today.

Vacating an injunction on the Odia devotional number “Sathi Pauti Bhoga”, the court observed that copyright “is a bundle of rights” and its assignment must be limited to what the parties intended at the time of the agreement.

The bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur, in his detailed order, said that Inreco Entertainment Pvt Ltd had failed to make out a prima facie case of continuing ownership over the work. The company had claimed that it acquired the rights through agreements executed between 1977 and 1980 with singer Bhikari Bal and lyricist Radhanath Das. It alleged that the Bhikari Bal Foundation and others had infringed its copyright by uploading the song on digital platforms.

The court noted that the documents relied upon by Inreco “expressly deal with records” and appear confined to the manufacture and sale of physical media for a limited period. The agreements, which referred to the supply of original plates and royalty payments, were valid for only two years. There was nothing to suggest that the contracts were intended to cover new or future technologies. “The rights conferred were circumscribed by the medium and the mode of exploitation known to the parties at the time,” the order observed. The court also pointed out prima facie discrepancies in signatures on the agreements and the absence of any record of royalty payments, half-yearly statements, or correspondence showing continued exercise of rights. The court further held that the “balance of convenience” did not favour the petitioner, since no irreparable injury would be caused by allowing the song to remain available online.

Finding no continuing entitlement that could justify an injunction, the court vacated the ad-interim order of July 12, 2023, dismissed the application, and directed both parties to move toward an early trial.

The ruling serves as a reminder that while melodies may outlast generations, copyrights do not automatically travel with time—they must be renewed, renegotiated and proven, said a legal expert acquainted with such cases.