Music composer cannot license underlying lyrics or sound recordings of film songs without authorization from the producer.

The Appellant (Ilaiyaraaja), a renowned music composer, licensed the right to adapt and recreate the song "En Iniya Pon Nilave" from the 1980 film Moodu Pani to Vels Film International Limited (VFIL) for a new film Aghathiyaa.

The Respondent (Saregama/SIL) filed a suit for permanent injunction, claiming ownership of the literary, musical, and sound recording copyrights based on a 1980 agreement with the original producer, Raja Cine Arts (RCA).

The learned Single Judge granted an ad interim injunction against the Appellant, holding that while the composer is the author of the musical work, the producer becomes the first owner of the sound recording and associated musical works in a cinematograph film under Section 17, and the 2012 amendments protecting authors' rights were not retrospective.

1. Whether the composer of a musical work retains the right to adapt that work under Section 14(a)(vi) after it has been incorporated into a cinematograph film.

2. Whether the second proviso to Section 17 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (introduced in 2012) applies to works and agreements created in 1980.

3. Whether the assignment by the composer to a third party (VFIL) was valid in respect of the lyrics and sound recording of the original song.

Section 2(p) defining "musical work" as music excluding lyrics.

Under Section 2(d)(ii) and (v), the composer is the "author" of a musical work, while the producer is the author of a sound recording or cinematograph film.

Section 13(4) provides that copyright in a film/sound recording shall not affect the separate copyright in the underlying works.

Section 14(a) defines the exclusive rights of literary and musical work owners, specifically the right to "adaptation" under Section 14(a)(vi).

Section 17, Proviso (b) stipulates circumstances where the person commissioning a work for valuable consideration becomes the first owner.

The court noted the 2012 amendment to Section 17 (second proviso) as prospective.

The court reasoned that as the composer, Ilaiyaraaja is the author and first owner of the "musical work" (music alone) under Section 17 and 2(d)(ii).

Under Section 13(4), this copyright survives the incorporation of the song into a film, meaning Ilaiyaraaja retained the exclusive right to adapt the music under Section 14(a)(vi).

The court found the 2023 agreement between Ilaiyaraaja and VFIL legally flawed: Ilaiyaraaja purported to license the "sound recording" and "lyrics," neither of which he owned.

Copyright in the sound recording belonged to the producer (RCA) and was validly assigned to SIL in 1980.

While Ilaiyaraaja could adapt the music, he could not authorize the recreation of the lyrics or the sound recording which formed the core of the impugned song in Aghathiyaa.

The court further held that the 2012 amendments do not retrospectively alter the ownership status of works created in 1980.

The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Single Judge’s injunction.