In an appeal filed by Azure Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court observed that Phonographic Performance Limited (‘PPL’) is clearly engaged in the business of issuing and granting licenses for sound recordings. The activities of PPL fall squarely within the ambit of Section 33 of the Copyright Act, 1957. According to Section 33, the business of licensing copyrighted works can only be carried out by a registered copyright society.
The Division Bench’s observations stand in contrast to the previous rulings where entities such as PPL were permitted to issue and grant licenses for sound recordings. Once entities like PPL are rightfully assigned rights by the original producers/owners, they become the copyright owners of the assigned works under Section 18. Additionally, under Section 30, which permits a copyright owner to license their rights, PPL would be entitled to license the sound recordings assigned to it. However, the Court noted that accepting such an interpretation in isolation would render Section 33, which mandates registration for entities engaged in the business of licensing copyright, redundant. In view of this, the Court modified the Single Judge’s order and directed that Azure Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. must make payments as per the tariff listed on the registered copyright society – Recorded Music Performance Limited’s website, if it intends to continue using sound recordings from PPL’s repertoire.
Source: Azure Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. v. Phonographic Performance Limited [FAO(OS) (COMM) 41/2025]