• About
  • Contcat Us
Friday, May 9, 2025
Justice Bench
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Forums
  • Online Internship
  • Courses
  • Videos
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Forums
  • Online Internship
  • Courses
  • Videos
No Result
View All Result
justice bench
No Result
View All Result
ADVERTISEMENT
Home News

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed a notice that allowed for the playing of music at weddings without the permission of the copyright owner

S Sreedhar by S Sreedhar
May 26, 2022
in News
Reading Time: 4 mins read
0
0
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed a notice that allowed for the playing of music at weddings without the permission of the copyright owner

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed a notice that allowed for the playing of music at weddings without the permission of the copyright owner

0
SHARES
7
VIEWS

In Novex Communications Private Limited v. Union of India & Anr, Justice Raj Mohan Singh, a single-judge, concluded that the notice offering such a broad exemption breaches the Copyright Act’s protections for copyright owners.

A public notice issued by the Registrar of Copyrights that allowed sound recordings to be played at religious rituals and wedding processions without getting a permission from the copyright owner was recently rejected by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

The notice offering such a broad exemption, according to single-judge Justice Raj Mohan Singh, violates the Copyright Act’s protections for copyright owners.

READ ALSO

APERC’s Landmark Ruling Balancing Regulatory Autonomy and Renewable Energy Goals

Supreme Court Declines Order for ECI to Release Polling Booth Vote Counts

“The public notice seeks to impinge upon the fundamental rights and protections granted by the Constitution of India and is violative of Articles 13 and 14 of the Constitution. The protections granted by Copyright Act are sought to be abridged by the public notice which is unsustainable,”

The Court stated

Novex Communications Private Limited, a corporation that owns copyright to a huge number of sound recordings from well-known music labels such as Zee, Eros, Tips, and others, filed a writ petition with the court.

The Registrar of Copyrights (respondent) issued a notice on August 27, 2019, interpreting Section 52(1) za of the Copyright Act to mean that using any sound recording during a religious or marriage ceremony does not constitute a copyright infringement, and thus no licence is required to play such songs during such events.

The petitioner went to the High Court, claiming that such an interpretation of codified law is under the judicial domain, or that it falls under the legislative domain as a clarification and amendment.

As a result, it was argued that the respondent lacked the authority to undertake a legislative duty.

The Court stated at the outset that the question of whether sound recordings can be played at social occasions such as weddings is no longer res integra (not examined/decided) and has been resolved by a number of decisions, notably M/s Phonographic Performance Ltd. v. State of Punjab.

Section 52 exempts live performances of such works when there is no commercial motive, no entry price, and they are utilised only for educational, religious, or charity purposes and not for financial benefit, according to the single-judge.

As a result, the Court stated that the question of whether particular activities belong under the exempted categories mentioned in Section 52(1) of the Act must be decided on the facts of each case.

Under section 52(1) za of the Copyright Act, there cannot be a blanket exemption for marriages and similar functions, and in circumstances where such exploitation was for commercial objectives, the owners would be entitled to both civil and criminal remedies under the Act, the Court judge stated.

“The question whether certain acts would fall within the exempted categories as enumerated under Section 52(1) of the Act has to be decided according to facts of each case. In view of aforesaid, there cannot be general interpretation to the provision as given in the impugned public notice/letter,” 

Order Stated

It was also noted that the challenged public notice could be used by notorious elements to play sound recordings in commercial premises for commercial advantage.

Furthermore, the Court stated that the Registrar of Copyright lacked the power to issue such a notification because he lacks the authority to clarify or interpret the law’s applicability under the Copyright Act.

“The impugned public notice was also violative of the doctrine of separation of power as an attempt had been made by respondent No.2 to usurp the legislative power of enactment and judicial power of interpretation,” 

The Court Said

Furthermore, it infringes on the petitioner’s right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution and overrules copyright provisions, according to the judge who quashed the notice.

Senior Advocate Gaurav Chopra represented the petitioner, who was advised by MPS Legal offices’ Jasdeep Singh Dhillon and Harinder Bains.

Sudhir Nar, an advocate, represented the Union government.

Read Order

Novex_Communications_Private_Limited_v__Union_of_India___Anr_Download
Tags: 52(A) zacopy rightcopy right actmusicNovex Communications Private LimitedNovex Communications Private Limited v. Union of India & AnrThe Punjab and Haryana High Court
ShareTweetSendShare

Related Posts

Sir P.V.R Reddy, IRS Rtd
APERC

APERC’s Landmark Ruling Balancing Regulatory Autonomy and Renewable Energy Goals

May 6, 2025
News

Supreme Court Declines Order for ECI to Release Polling Booth Vote Counts

May 26, 2024
Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp  is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court
News

Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court

February 13, 2024
Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.
News

Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.

February 13, 2024
The Supreme Court declines to stay the Madras High Court's ruling dismissing the challenge against Google Play's billing policy.
News

The Supreme Court declines to stay the Madras High Court’s ruling dismissing the challenge against Google Play’s billing policy.

February 12, 2024
election commission, supreme court news, Patna Court News, Clock Election symbol, NCP, Sharad Pawar, Ajit Pawar
News

Know More: Ajit Pawar Election symbol clock for NCP by the Election Commission

February 7, 2024
google news
google news

POPULAR NEWS

La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino'z - know more

La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino’z – know more

May 20, 2022
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADVOCATE AND LAWYER

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ADVOCATE AND A LAWYER?

June 4, 2022
Know About Registration Of The Partition Document Is Compulsory?

Know About Registration Of The Partition Document Is Compulsory?

January 1, 2024
Justices DY Chandrachud, AS Bopanna, and Bela M. Trivedi,

Execution of Document not to be considered based on Admission of Sign on Document Rules Supreme Court

May 12, 2022
multiple bar association enrollment

Can an Advocate Enroll for Multiple Bar Associations?

May 8, 2022

Tags

advocate Algo Legal Allahabad HC Allahabad High Court Anil Deshmukh anticipatory bail Appointment of Judges bail Bombay high court calcutta high court central government cji Collegium Collegium Recommendations contempt of court defamation delhi high court divorce Enforcement Directorate Gujarat High court Gyanvapi Mosque high court judges IPR Judicial Appointments justice bench karnataka high court kerala high court latest judgements law ministry legal news madras high court murder patna high court pil pocso act public interest litigation rajasthan high court Rouse Avenue Court Sequoia Capital study material supreme court Supreme Court Collegium supreme court of india Union Law Ministry varanasi court

APERC’s Landmark Ruling Balancing Regulatory Autonomy and Renewable Energy Goals

by S Sreedhar
May 6, 2025
0
Sir P.V.R Reddy, IRS Rtd
APERC

Precedent No. JB 2025 APERC OP 91 The APERC Headed by Hon'ble Sir P.V.R. Reddy, Member & Chairman (i/c) in...

Read more

Supreme Court Declines Order for ECI to Release Polling Booth Vote Counts

by S Sreedhar
May 26, 2024
0
News

On Friday, the Supreme Court declined to issue an interim order on a petition from the NGO Association for Democratic...

Read more

Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court

by S Sreedhar
February 13, 2024
0
Know More: Sending Demand notices through email or WhatsApp  is valid in cheque dishonor cases: Allahabad High Court
News

Is a legal notice sent through WhatsApp or email legal?

Read more

Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.

by S Sreedhar
February 13, 2024
0
Know More: The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Mumbai has accepted a bankruptcy petition against Dream11.
News

National Company Law Tribunal,NCLT Mumbai,Dream 11

Read more

About

Justice Bench is one of the fastest growing news legal portal in India, for latest Latest Legal News india, Supreme Court judgement updates, High Courts Judgments updates,Law Firms News in india, Law School News, Latest Legal News india visit us.

Follow us

Latest Court News

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Forums
  • Online Internship
  • Courses
  • Videos

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

Welcome Back!

Sign In with Google
OR

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Sign Up with Google
OR

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In