The suit relates to the Plaintiff’s claim in relation to musical works forming part of cinematographic films produced by her deceased father. The Plaintiff in her capacity as the legal heir, contended that pursuant to certain Agreements executed by her father between the period 1965 and 1980, the rights to exploit the works of songs and recordings forming parts of seven films were assigned to the Defendants for a specific term only. Subsequent to correspondence exchanged between period 2004 and 2006, after a gap of four years, in 2019, the Plaintiff through her Advocate’s letter informed the Defendants that the subject Agreements were not valid and subsisting and also demanded statement of account for royalty payable together with interest and called upon the Defendant No. 2 to cease and desist from dealing with the rights granted under the subject Agreements. In 2012 the Plaintiff filed the above referred lawsuit in which amongst other reliefs the Plaintiff sought to restrain the Defendants from infringing the Plaintiff’s copyright in the songs, musical works and musical rights in films produced by her deceased father.
After hearing the rival contentions of both the parties and on an interpretation of the subject Agreement(s) Court dismissed the suit holding that the:
(a.) Plaintiff had failed to establish that the subject Agreement(s) had expired.
(b.) Plaintiff’s contention that exploitation of rights by the Defendant(s) was confined to works in physical medium was misconceived.
(c.) Defendant(s) had absolute and perpetual rights to exploit the subject works “by any and every means” even though at the time of execution of the subject Agreement(s), the subject works were recorded in gramophone records. Hence the scope and purview of exploitation also extended to modern digital and non-physical mediums.
(d.) 1983, 1994 and 2012 amendments to the Copyright Act, 1957 (the “Act”) could not have a retrospective bearing on the interpretation of the subject Agreement(s). Such being the case, the subject Agreement(s) had to be interpreted basis the provisions of the Act when they were executed and which the Parties had knowingly entered into under the Act as it was then in force. Consequently, the rights assigned under them were broad and without limitations.
This decision may have a bearing on existing agreements between producers and entities to whom rights in musical works or songs are assigned.