The Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v. Mr. Aditya Pandey And Anr.

Every founder organizing a live event, concert, or public performance carries a hidden risk: a single song on stage can trigger copyright claims from not one, but two separate rights societies. The case of the Indian Performing Right Society versus Mr. Aditya Pandey and others exposes this exact trap, delivering a wake-up call to anyone in the entertainment, events, or media business who assumes a single license covers everything.

The Indian Performing Right Society (IPRS), the body that administers public performing rights for authors, composers, and publishers of literary and musical works in India, found itself in a dispute with defendants including Mr. Aditya Pandey, Synergy Media, and CRI Events. IPRS alleged that these parties were publicly performing copyrighted musical and literary works without obtaining the necessary licenses. The defendants were event organizers and media companies operating in the public performance space, where copyrighted songs are routinely played or performed before audiences. The friction arose not from a simple question of whether a license was needed, but from a deeper question: whose license is needed, and how many licenses does a single performance actually require?

IPRS argued that its rights covered the public performance of the underlying literary and musical works, meaning any entity playing or performing these compositions publicly owed IPRS a licensing fee. The defendants and the broader legal question, however, drew a sharp line between two distinct categories of copyrighted material: the original musical and literary compositions (the song itself, its lyrics, and its melody) and the sound recordings (the specific recorded version of that song). The counter-position, supported by the court's analysis, recognized that phonographic societies, such as PPRS, hold a separate and independent set of rights over sound recordings. This created a legal friction: IPRS claimed its license alone should suffice, while the broader copyright framework suggested that performing a recorded song in public involves two layers of protected material, each governed by a different rights holder.

On 28 July 2011, the court issued interim directions that cut through the ambiguity with practical clarity. The court ruled that when a public performance involves both original musical or literary works, which fall under IPRS's domain, and recorded sound versions of those works, which fall under the phonographic societies' domain, authorization from both IPRS and PPRS is necessary. The court drew a clear boundary: IPRS's license covers the underlying composition, while the phonographic society's license covers the sound recording. Neither license substitutes for the other. The interim order effectively meant that defendants like Synergy Media and CRI Events could not rely on a single license to cover all aspects of their public performances.

For founders, event organizers, media companies, and anyone in the entertainment ecosystem, the lesson is unambiguous: if your business involves public performances of music, whether at concerts, corporate events, clubs, or broadcasts, you need to secure licenses from both IPRS and the relevant phonographic society. A license from one does not cover the other. Building a compliance checklist that accounts for both layers of copyright protection from day one is not just good legal hygiene; it is the only way to avoid infringement claims that can disrupt operations, drain finances, and damage reputation. When in doubt, audit every performance for dual licensing requirements before the music starts.