Playing IPRS-Owned Music In Hotel Rooms Without Licence Is Copyright Infringement: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has restrained Hotel Appolo & Tours Private Limited from communicating literary and musical works owned by members of The Indian Performing Right Society Limited (IPRS) to guests through television sets in its hotel rooms without first obtaining a valid licence from the copyright society.

It held that routing cable television connections to hotel rooms amounts to "communication to the public" under the Copyright Act, 1957.

A division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi observed, "The respondent was guilty of infringement of copyright of literary and musical works owned by the members of the appellant society in view of the provisions contained in Section 51 of the Copyrights Act, 1957. The learned Trial Court was not justified in holding that the appellant/plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case. In fact, the appellant made out a strong prima facie case."

The bench set aside an order of the District Judge, Darjeeling, which had refused to grant IPRS an interim injunction.

IPRS had sued the hotel, alleging that it was communicating literary and musical works owned by its members through cable-connected television sets installed in guest rooms without obtaining a license or paying royalty. It sought a permanent injunction, rendition of accounts of profits, and damages of ₹9 lakh.

Along with the suit, IPRS sought an interim injunction. The district court rejected the plea, holding that IPRS had conflated copyright with broadcast reproduction rights under Section 37 of the Copyright Act. It also found that the hotel had no role in the alleged use of the copyrighted works.

IPRS challenged that order before the high court. It argued that under Section 2(ff) of the Copyright Act, making literary and musical works available in hotel rooms through cable connections amounts to communication to the public and therefore requires a licence from the copyright owner.

While examining the dispute, the bench considered the definitions of "cable operator", "cable service" and "subscriber" under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995. It held that guests staying in hotel rooms cannot be treated as "subscribers" because the cable service obtained by the hotel was being extended to persons other than the subscriber itself.

"We are not in a position to accept that the guests staying in hotel rooms of the respondent are 'subscribers' within the meaning of Section 2(i) of the Act of 1995)," the bench observed.

Referring to Section 52(1)(k) of the Copyright Act, the bench noted that the provision distinguishes hotels from residential premises while carving out an exception for certain acts that do not amount to copyright infringement.

"Section 52(1)(k) differentiates between residential premises and hotel. It also draws a distinction between activities carried on for profit from that being not for profit, in order to determine the act of infringement," the bench observed.

The bench found that although the hotel did not separately charge guests for cable television, the facility added commercial value to its business. It therefore amounted to commercial exploitation of the literary and musical works owned by IPRS members.

"In such way, the actions on the part of the respondent surely fell within the meaning of 'commercial exploitation' of the literary and musical works owned by the members of the appellant," the bench ruled.

Rejecting the district court's reasoning, the high court held that the cable operator's licence did not permit the hotel to commercially communicate copyrighted works to its guests.

It observed that the operator's licence was confined to its subscribers, and the hotel was required to obtain its own licence from IPRS before making those works available in guest rooms.

The high court accordingly set aside the district court's order and allowed IPRS's application for an interim injunction.