SpicyIP Tidbit: DPIIT Hits Pause on Public Notice concerning Music Playing at Weddings Amid Novex Case Appeal

10 views

Skip to first unread message

lokesh vyas

unread,

Nov 21, 2024, 4:46:22 AM11/21/24

to spi...@googlegroups.com

Namaskar.

Remember the Goan circular concerning section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act, 1957, saying no permission is required to perform music at religious ceremonies, including weddings and its connected social events, which was later revoked? And many other stories of the provision we’ve commented on in the past? Well, we now have a “new” twist in this story …

The news is that DPIIT has issued a new notification that puts the previous 24th July 2023 Public Notice on hold (on which Gaurangi commented here). The notification, however, states that such a hold is subject to the outcome of an appeal pending before the Punjab and Haryana High Court against the order of Novex Communication Pvt. Ltd. v/s Union of India.

For those less familiar, Section 52(1)(Za) exempts from copyright infringement the performance of a literary, dramatic, or musical work or the communication to the public of such work or of a sound recording in the course of any bona fide religious ceremony or an official ceremony held by the Central Government or the State Government or any local authority. Plus, it contains an “explanation” stating that for this clause, a religious ceremony includes a marriage procession and other social festivities associated with a marriage. Given the tricky terms in the provision, like “bona fide” and “other social festivities,” it has been a constant cause of consternation.

Here’s a bit of Context of the New Notification

The notice of July 2023 (see here) directed copyright societies to refrain from doing anything contrary to Section 52 (1)(za) to avoid legal action. It also cautioned the general public not to accede to any uncalled demands from any individual/organization/copyright society that violate the said provision. As said above, this new 2024 DPIIT notification keeps the 2023 public notice in abeyance, for there is a pending appeal against the order passed in the Novex case by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. So, based on the appeal’s outcome, the 2023 notification would either stay or go.

Regarding the Novex case, which is the nucleus of this new notification. It quashed the 2019 public notice, which stated that using any sound recording during religious ceremonies, including marriage processions and other festive events connected to a wedding, did not amount to copyright infringement and hence required no license. The Court gave two main reasons for quashing (see paras 14-16) – 1.) the notice incorrectly provides a general interpretation of the provision, which is supposed to be case and facts specific; 2.) it violates the separation of power as the executive cannot “usurp the legislative power of enactment and judicial power of interpretation.”

To sum up, several notices on this matter have been issued: first, the 2019 notice, which was later revoked in the Novex case; the 2022 Jaipur notice, which was stayed by PPL vs. State of Rajasthan; the 2023 Goan Circular, which was also eventually revoked in PPL vs. State of Goa; and the 2023 DPIIT notice, which is now kept in abeyance by DPIIT.

Previous Discussion on the Blog

Given the issue has been on a long (never-ending?) legal journey from circulars to courtrooms, below is an excerpt summarizing the previous discussion on the blog:

“The issue has come up several times and was covered on the blog. Before this [Goan] circular, a notification dated 24th July 2023 was issued by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT). Last year [in 2022], the Police Commissionerate, of Jaipur also issued a similar circular as discussed by Gaurangi Kapoor. Earlier, we also had a notification in 2019 which was later invalidated in 2022 by the Punjab and Haryana High Court for being ultra vires. In 2022, the Delhi High Court appointed Prof. Arul Scaria as an expert on this issue in Phonographic Performance Limited vs Lookpart Exhibitions and Events Private Ltd. However, the parties later settled the dispute out of the court so no clarity came at last. (See Prof. Scaria’s full report here and Praharsh’s discussion here). Well … ‘tis just a glimpse of the long-going discussion on the topic. For more details and context, please check Reva Satish Makhija’s most recent post titillatingly titled – Wedding Bells or Warning Bells? PPL Refuses to Give an NOC to Play its Sound Recordings at Sangeet, Cocktail Party.

Like Reva and many others, I also wonder why is there even a need to issue such notifications when Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act 1957 explicitly exempts “the performance of a literary, dramatic or musical work or the communication to the public of such work or of a sound recording in the course of any bona fide religious ceremony or an official ceremony held by the Central Government or the State Government or any local authority.” The provision also carries an additional explanation which reads that “For the purpose of this clause, religious ceremony including a marriage procession and other social festivities associated with a marriage.”

Well … for one, provisions with phrases like “bona fide” or “other related social festivities” etc. are often up for grabs. As Devika discussed the issue earlier, underscoring cases like Phonographic Performance Ltd. v. State of Punjab where the Court interpreted the provisions narrowly. Similarly, Anjali detailedly discussed the Delhi High Court’s problematic interpretation of the provision in Ten Events and Entertainment v. Novex Communications Pvt. Ltd. Her post is worth checking as she microscopically parses the provision, Section 52(1)(za), and presents the contrarieties in the Court’s understanding.”

So, What’s Next?

Well, God knows. What I do know, however, is that the eternal question—worth lakhs or even more Rupees—continues to linger: Can you play music at weddings and other connected social activities without a license? Or, legally speaking, does Section 52(1)(za) come to the rescue in such a case? For now, for those who have not read Prof. Arul Scaria’s detailed report, I recommend reading it here. And, for others, let’s wait for clarity from the Punjab and Haryana High Court. While the Court’s website does not state the next hearing of the case, if the readers are in the know of any details of this pending case (or any other important development), please let us know. Until then, keep the playlists ready (and even rehearse some dance moves)—but maybe avoid the dance floor until a legal light turns green :).