Music Industry and Copyright Law in India

I. Introduction

Copyright is a right given by the law to creators of literacy, dramatic, musical, and artistic works and producers of cinematograph films and sound recordings. It is a bundle of rights including, inter alia, rights of reproduction, communication to the public, adaptation, and translation of the work. There could be slight variations in the composition of the rights depending on the work (Professional Book Publishers, 2021).

Copyright ensures certain minimum safeguards of the rights of authors over their creations, thereby protecting and rewarding creativity. Creativity being the keystone of progress, no civilised society can afford to ignore the basic requirement of encouraging the same. The economic and social development of a society is dependent on creativity. The protection provided by copyright to the efforts of writers, artists, designers, dramatists, musicians, architects, and producers of sound recordings, cinematograph films, and computer software creates an atmosphere conducive to creativity, which induces them to create more and motivates others to create (Professional Book Publishers, 2021).

For a culturally diverse country like India, special attention is needed in the case of music. The rich and diverse heritage of India's music industry from hundreds of years forms the people's socio-religious aspects. Music has no language barrier, and it has a universal application. From the global success of the Spanish Despacito song to the worldwide acceptance of Korean pop band BTS depicts the acceptance of songs irrespective of the language. It helps create a good culture across the board by accepting disparate cultures. It has a crucial aspect of uniting people all over the world.

A song is not only made by instruments but also the creation of the human intellect. Each musical note is unique to itself. The moment when musical work is used for monetary benefit, it needs special protection. Under the IPR regime, copyright can be the best option to give protection to musical works. Due to the subjective nature of musical works, every type of infringement has to analyse separately (Pathak, 2020).

A. NEED AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The rise and massive acceptance of social media kick-started different kinds of online copyright violations. Musical works are the prominent category among them. The music, lyrics, and visuals of every song need special protection. Recent incidents on copyright violations and plagiarism controversies on musical works make this area more significant. A study on this area is a mandate, particularly in this pandemic because social media platforms were largely accepted. A musical work, as intellectual property, should be protected in both online and offline mediums. Various issues related to copyright protection on musical works should be identified on this behalf.

B. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF RESEARCH PAPER

• To understand various copyright protections available to musical works in India.
• To identify different copyright violations in musical works.
• To analyse some practical questions related to musical works.

C. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

• To what extent does mere resemblance in a song constitute an infringement of copyright?
• What is the freedom of a music creator to use another’s work as an inspiration even without crediting the original owner?
• How do you find the boundary between inspiration and plagiarism in musical works?

D. HYPOTHESIS

• Mere resemblance can constitute the infringement of copyright in a musical work.
• Crediting the author for inspiration is a subjective matter, and it can be varied according to the circumstances of each case.
• The boundary between inspiration and plagiarism is very narrow.

E. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The method of conducting a study on the topic has doctrinal. The relevant legislation in the area has been referred. Most of the sources are online. Various websites and YouTube videos have been referred to complete the study.

II. Historical aspects of musical works and copyright law

"The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 had been largely developed through the copyright laws of our colonisers, the British. Not only the derived version was ambiguous with wordings but also eccentric to the still-emerging Indian music industry. Copyright in Musical works has always since 1957 been giving various interpretations; under the initial act, only the composer of the song had a copyright in the musical work, with the Act being amended in 1994, the scope of the definition was expanded to include 'work consisting of music and any graphical notation but does not include any words or actions intended to be spoken'. This particular amendment was more inclusive and well fitted to the Indian Music industry scenario” (Rai, 2020).

The author of a work is generally considered to be the first owner of that work as per the Copyright Act. There was only one right to claim over a song in the early days, but today, every part of a single song can be the subject matter to claim copyright protection. It is applicable in the case of every original literary, dramatic, music, and artwork. During the time, Indian copyright laws were undergone different changes, and it gave more importance to their owner’s exclusive rights from lyricists to musicians. Their rights are protected by current copyright law (Rai, 2020).

Over time, independent musicians became more popular because showcase platforms became more accessible. They could begin their careers by introducing themselves before the public, even without the support of music labels and production houses. However, there was a parallel reality in which the music and film industry would fail to survive without the cooperation of others. Gradually, music started to play an important role in movies, and sometimes, the music got more love and acceptance by the people. But even in such cases, it was not the music composer who benefited from the song, but the producer or the music label got benefited depending on to whom the right had been assigned (Rai, 2020). When determining what constitutes infringement, the Court in R.G Anand v/s M/S Delux Films case (R.G Anand vs M/S. Delux Films, 1978) court held that "there can be no copyright in an idea, subject matter, themes, plots or historical or legendary facts and violation of the copyright in such cases is confined to the form, manner and arrangement and expression of the idea by the author of the copyrighted work” (Rai, 2020).

Where the same concept is developed differently, it is clear that there will be similarities as the source is common. In such a case, the courts must determine whether there are similarities in the fundamental or significant aspects of the expression adopted in the copyrighted work. If the defendant's act is nothing more than a literal imitation of a copyrighted work with some variations here and there, it is tantamount to copyright infringement. In other words, to make the act actionable, the copy must be substantial and material, leading to the conclusion that the defendant is guilty of an act of piracy (Rai, 2020).

Copyright is an inalienable right in nature, and it comes naturally to the creator of any original “work”. It is the inherent right of the creator of the original expression of a particular idea to decide whether or not wants to use it by others and how to do it. Copyright protection is essential because once the owner of the work that created it is established and it is protected, it gives the author several rights, giving him full access to his monetisation without fear of being abused, reproducing, or modifying it without his permission or knowledge. If there is a copyright infringement, the owner has a legal leeway if the owner’s work is protected under copyright law (Rai, 2020).

Copyright protection of songs is essential to encourage writers, authors, and artists to create original works, in return for which they receive certain rights, financial benefits, and fame. Copyright protection creates a protected barrier that creates legal support and sanctions for breach of the barrier, protecting the creators of the original work from being misled by fraud (Rai, 2020).

III. Musical works under the copyright act, 1957

Copyright is the basic right given to an author or creator of an original work to prevent others from using it without his permission. In the case of literal work, the author has the exclusive right to claim a monopoly over his work. In the case of an artistic work, the artist and the cinematographic film will be the work of its producer (Cleartax, 2021).

Copyright of a musical work has some different aspects. Generally, copyright of a sone is done according to the provisions of Copyright Act, 1957 along with Copyright Rules, 2013 (Copyright Office, Govt of India, 2013).

Ownership of a Musical Work

A song is not treated as a single piece of work (Cleartax, 2021). A song can be identified as various works done by different people. Copyright Act has divided a song into different parts. The creator of each part can claim ownership over his part of the song. If one person does every part of the song, then he can obtain overall right over the whole song (Cleartax, 2021).

Rights of Owner

Indian Copyright law has always been treated as producer-centric, providing more protection for production houses and music labels than for composers and singers. Still, since the 2012 amendment came into force, this law provides better protection and ownership of the work to the authors, i.e., the musicians who create the music (Rai, 2020).

2012 Amendment and Music Industry

The trend in the music industry is either commissioned services or hired workers, in which the producer employs the services of a music composer or singer at a pre-determined cost, and the musician transfers all rights arising from the music. Works for the manufacturer. If there is an agreement between the music composer and the producer under Section 17 of the Act, it cannot be withdrawn (Rai, 2020). This was also rejected in the case of the Indian Performing Rights Society Limited v/s Eastern India Motion Picture Association (Indian Performing Rights Society Limited v/s Eastern India Motion Picture Association, 1977). In this case, the court held that the rights of a music director could be violated by the producer of a cinematographic film under Section 17(b) & (c) of the Act (Rai, 2020).

The rights are given to a music composer as copyright holders are granted in two sets of rights:

1) Economic Rights

2) Moral Rights

1) Economic Rights

These are the rights available to the authors of a work protected under Section 14 of the Copyright Act. It includes-

• Right to Reproduction u/s 14(a)(i): The author of the original musical work can recreate his work in any material form. Producing a copy of a song to a disc or releasing it on YouTube can also be considered as reproduction.
• Right to issue copies u/s 14(a)(ii): this right can be seen as a subdivision of the right to reproduce, in which the work is permitted to be distributed in a manner satisfactory to the copyright holder. The copyright holder reserves the right to transfer the rights associated with the copyrighted work in whole or in part. Distribution rights may be assigned to a music label. Copies of the song can only be made public if the music created by the composer is not already in the public domain.
• Performance Rights u/s 14(a)(iii): This Act gives the copyright holder the right to publicise the works he created. For example, A lyricist has the right to read the lyrics of a song he has written in any event.
• Right to Make Adaptions and Translation u/s 14(a)(v) & (vi): As the first owner of the musical work, the author has the right to transform or translate his work. For example, the Marathi song Singath was translated into a Hindi song Zingaat in the Hindi movie Dhadak in 2018.

2) Moral Rights

The Copyright Act u/s 57 confers certain rights on the author, contrary to whether or not the author has granted the rights arising out of the copyrighted work, which the court held in Ilayaraja’s Case. They are:

• Right To Paternity u/s 57 (1)(a): This law empowers the author to claim the authorship of his work, i.e., he has the right to claim the work as his own, regardless of the rights granted in favour of the producer or music label. The author has the right to receive the proper recognition of his work.
• Right to Restrain u/s 57 (1)(b): if the author's work is mutilated, modified, or distorted, they have the right to claim damages in a way that is detrimental to the author's honour and reputation.
• Performers Rights: A singer’s song’s rights are available in a performer’s capacity under section 38 of the Act. The Act recognises a performer for the following:

i. To make an audio recording or visual recordings of his performance, including-

• Reproduce it in any material form, including material stored in any medium.
• Distribute copies to the public as they are not already popular copies.
• It communicates with the public
• Offer commercial rental or sale.

ii. Broadcast or communicate the performance to the public, except where the performance has already been broadcast (Rai, 2020).

Normally, there are possibilities to claim copyright protection over a song by the following people. They are,

1) Lyricist

Section 2(d)(i) of the Copyright Act, 1957 says that, in the case of literary or dramatic work, the person who writes it will be the author of the work. The lyrics of a song are also considered as a literary work, and the author will be the lyricist. Therefore, the lyricist can obtain copyright protection over the lyrical portion of the song (Cleartax, 2021).

2) Composer

Concerning a piece of music in terms of Section 2 (d) (ii) of the Act, the composer is its author. According to Section 2(p) of the Act, a musical work is a composition that contains music and includes a graphical notation of such works but does not include words or actions intended to be sung, spoken, or performed with the music. Thus, musical work provides the music to the lyrical part of the song. The composer of a song is the person who composes the music for a song and thus the author of the music of the song. He can get the copyright of the background music in a song (Cleartax, 2021).

3) Singer

Section 2(qq) of the Copyright Act defines a performer and “a performer includes an actor, singer, musician, dancer, acrobat, juggler, conjurer, snake charmer, a person delivering a lecture or any other person who makes a performance” (Copyright Office, Govt. of India, 1957), which includes a singer. When a singer performs a song, the presenter has a right to his performance. He reserves the right to make audio recordings of his performance, reproduce it, or provide copies of it in an electronic medium. He has the right to sell copies or recordings he has made. He reserves the right to protect his copies or recordings against infringement. But the rights of a performer do not affect the author’s rights, i.e., the lyricist and the composer of the song (Cleartax, 2021).

4) Producer

The author of the sound recording is the person who records the sound under Section 2 (d) (v) of the Act. Section 2 (uu) defines the producer of a sound recording as the person who takes the initiative and is responsible for doing the work. Since the producer of a movie or album takes over the recording of a song and broadcasts it on the movie or album, he is the author of the song’s recording. Thus, he gets the copyright of the recording of the song (Cleartax, 2021).

Term of Copyright in Musical Works

Copyright in literary and musical works shall remain in force for sixty years from the date of his death. Therefore, the copyright of the lyricist and composer will remain until the date of their death and sixty years after their death. The copyright of the audio recording is sixty years from the beginning of the calendar year, the year after its publication. Thus, the manufacturer’s copyright will be sixty years from the next year of publication. The rights of the performer or singer of a song will be fifty years from the year following the performance (Cleartax, 2021).

Need to Give Copyright Protection to Musical Works

“The music industry has an intricately woven relationship with the movie industry. Though both are indeed interdependent, the industry norms are structured in such a way, so that movie industries simultaneously benefit from the music industry as well. There has been rampant exploitation and monetisation of music and musicians by film producers and music labels for several years they have been deprived of the exorbitant amounts of profits that the producers or music labels make out of commercial exploitation of the music either by releasing the music individually or incorporation of the song in the movie” (Rai, 2020).

There is an acute need to prioritise the rights of music composers over the rights of those responsible for the exploitation of music alone. 2012 Amendment of the Copyright Act confirms the Delhi Court’s judgment in the Indian Performing Rights Society v/s Aditya Pandey (Indian Performing Rights Society v/s Aditya Pandey, 2018). In this case, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that "the authors of literary and musical works incorporated in sound recordings would remain entitled to receive an equal share of royalties accruing from the utilisation of the sound recordings" (Rai, 2020).

“The 2012 Amendment is an attempt to safeguard the rights of authors of literary, musical, and artistic work forming a part of a cinematograph film, has been given the un-waivable right to receive royalties. Section 18(1), inserted through Amendment Act 2012, provides that the author of a literary or musical work incorporated in a cinematograph film or sound recording shall not assign the right to receive royalties in any form other than as a part of the film or sound recording. Even after all rights that are available to the author of the artistic, musical, or literary work u/s 14 of the Act have been duly assigned out to the music label or the producer; he cannot waive off his right to receive royalty payments once his work has been put to use. Copyright registration grants legal status to the creative work, thereby making it an intellectual property and creating and granting the owner legal cover" (Rai, 2020).

IV. Analyzing certain situations related to musical works

Interplay Between Remix and Copyright

Copyright in a musician’s original work raises a question about the legitimacy of remixes of their songs. Copyright law does not define the term “remix”. The remix is just a modified version of the original song with some small additions and shortcomings in the lyrics with some beats (Nath, 2020).

Take the example of the famous song “Thamma Thamma” from the 1990 Indian movie “Thanedaar”. The same song is remixed and used in the “Badrinath Ki Dulhania” movie. The old song was replaced with modern essence and new beats. Therefore, a major legal challenge is to protect the rights of the author of the remixed work and the rights of the author of the original work without infringing copyright law (Nath, 2020).

Section 52 of the Copyright Act, 1957 protects the producers of a remix. Section 51 says that if any person infringes the rights granted to the copyright holder, it will be recorded as infringement. However, this will not result in a breach if:

• A person copies a musical, artistic, or any other work in advance of his intention and pays royalties in advance to the owner of the original work. As in the case of remix songs, royalties are paid in advance to the author.
• Do not market new work with labels or packaging that mislead the public about the identity of the original creator of the work.
• No new work is allowed until two years after the end of the year in which the original works were done.
• The author of the original work should be given the right to inspect all the books of account related to the new work (Nath, 2020).

Remix versions of songs in every music industry require the same protection as original works when such remix versions are legally launched following the guidelines outlined above. A major problem with “remixes” is the extent of the actual contribution to the adaptation of the old work, and nowhere is the amount of royalty specified, which leads to a small payment to the original owner of the work (Nath, 2020).

The Basic Seven Notes and Issue of Copyright in Music

Every “music” in the world is basically from the seven notes. There are specific pitches that make up standard notes in music. Most musicians use a standard called the Chromatic Scale. The chromatic scale has seven major musical notes, A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, each representing a different frequency or pitch (Ducksters, 2021). Since every musician follows the same pattern to make new music , there is an inherent chance to become musical works similar to other works. in such a situation, it will be more difficult to identify whether the subsequent work is infringing the copyright protection of the previous work or not.

Can Mere Resemblance in the Mind of the People Constitute be a Copyright Infringement of the Earlier Work?

A mere resemblance in an audience’s mind constitutes copyright infringement or not is the next question regarding similarity in musical works. In R.G Anand v/s Delux Films (R.G Anand vs M/S. Delux Films, 1978) Case, the Supreme Court of India suggested the test called 'Audience Test', which is a suitable, more practicable test to determine the similarity. But in the case of musical works, it will not be applicable in every situation. There can be some mere resemblance in musical works, and it is not correct to say that all such resemblance will constitute copyright infringement.

For example, the initial portion of the famous 2019 song “7 Rings” by the American pop singer Ariana Grande is similar to the 1985 Indian-Malayalam movie song “Thannannam Thaanannam Thaalathil Aadi” from the film “Yathra”. But can it be said that Ariana Grandey’s song is a copy of an old Malayalam movie song? Of course not. In the first instance, everyone who knows the movie song will get the impression that it is similar to the song. Still, because of this mere resemblance, one cannot say that one is the copy of another, and it is not the right test to determine the infringement of copyright.

Another problem is the term "Audience". In the present example, the people from Kerala will only feel the resemblance with old Malayalam songs, and no one else in the world will feel it. In such a situation, how to determine the number of people who constitute "audience". Is it a group of people or the entire listeners of the song? Does the feeling of similarity in some listeners’ minds constitute infringement?

In the case of musical work, giving a conclusion about the similarity in the first instance is not the practical way. It is a subjective matter and needs a special inspection in each case. The mere resemblance does not constitute infringement, and special knowledge in music and copyright law is mandatory to deal with such cases.

Inspiration in Musical Works

The term adaptation is quite clear in musical works. Conversion of one work into another form needs permission from the owner of the original work. But what is the case in inspirations? It is a question. If one person gets an idea from another person’s work, there is no similarity between the two works. In such situations, is there any need to credit the work’s creator from which the person got the inspiration for his work? While trying to find out the answer, it again concludes that an idea is not a subject matter of copyright.

Plagiarism in Musical Works

A notable incident happened after the song’s release by the famous South Korean Boy Band BTS in 2016. Their popular song named "Blood, Sweat, and Tears" faced a plagiarism accusation from a French photographer Bernard Faucon. He claimed that this music video by BTS is similar to his work. According to the photographer, certain parts of BTS’s music video are similar to his 1978 work “Banquet” from “Summer Holidays”. According to the French artist, the clothing on the manner and the background are the same. He also claimed that a part of the cover photography for “Young Forever” was similar to his work. He also claimed that the group’s album title had been inspired by the title of his filming project, “The Most Beautiful Day of My Youth”, which took place in 25 countries from 1997 to 2003.

In August and September of 2018, Bernard Faucon issued two statements to Big Hit Entertainment, the parent company of BTS. According to the negotiation, he demanded an apology and compensation, but Big Hit refused to accept the claim. After that, Faucon sent a handwritten letter in October 2018 asking the agency to indicate that they had been inspired or that the ideas were a homage to this work. On 25^th February, Big Hit stated/ “Upon checking reports made today; we have conveyed our opinion that the claim of similarities raised by a gallery in September last year is not valid”.

By taking the said incident as an example, it can be identified that, because a song is a combination of various elements, there can be high chances to get a copyright claim even by taking a single scene from the music video and comparing it with a painting or with any other artwork. It is necessary to make a common guideline to fix the similarity in a musical work in such situations. But on the other hand, it is almost impossible because each musical work is independent and cannot be generalised under certain guidelines.

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India fixed the most suitable method to fix the similarity in works in R.G Anand v/s Delux Films (R.G Anand v. Delux Films, 1978). The main principles given by the Supreme Court are:

1) “There can be no copyright in an idea, subject matter, themes, plots, or historical or legendary facts, and violation of the copyright in such cases is confined to the form, manner and arrangement, and expression of the idea by the author of the copyrighted work”.

2) “Where the same idea is being developed differently, it is manifest that the source being common, similarities are bound to occur. In such a case, the courts should determine whether or not the similarities are on fundamental or substantial aspects of the mode of expression adopted in the copyrighted work. If the defendant's work is nothing but a literal imitation of the copyrighted work with some variations here and there, it will amount to a violation of the copyright. In other words, to be actionable, the copy must be a substantial and material one which at once leads to the conclusion that the defendant is guilty of an act of piracy”.

3) “One of the surest and safest tests to determine whether or not there has been a violation of copyright is to see if the reader, spectator, or the viewer after having read or seen both the works is clearly of the opinion and get unmistakable impression that the subsequent work appears to be a copy of the original”.

4) “Where the theme is the same but is presented and treated differently than the subsequent work becomes a completely new work, no question of violation of copyright arises”.

5) “Where, however, apart from the similarities appearing in the two walls there are also material and broad dissimilarities that negative the intention to copy the original and the coincidences appearing in the two works are incidental no infringement of the copyright came into existence”.

6) “As a violation of copyright amounts to an act of piracy must be provided by clear and cogent evidence after applying the various tests laid down by the case law”.

Copyright in Musical Works: A Task on Judiciary

Every case that comes to court has different facts, and the court needs to take special care to interpret legal provisions regarding the circumstance of each case. Suppose the matter is about a copyright violation in a musical work. In that case, the judge should be more careful, and the basic knowledge in musical works will help him to deal with the case more accurately. But in a practical aspect, it is impossible to expect a legal expert who is sound enough in music. Hence, it will be an additional task upon the judiciary to deal with copyright infringement cases in musical works.

V. Conclusion

A song contains various elements. The lyrics, music, and singing altogether make a complete musical work. The lyricist writes the song, and then the composer adds the musical part to it, and finally, it will have a complete form through the singer’s voice. The song may be performed by the singer or recorded in a studio by the song’s producer. Consequently, a song itself becomes a product of a compilation of the intellect of many people. But it cannot be claimed ownership over one piece of art by more than one person (Cleartax, 2021).

The Indian music industry is on an ever-evolving stage and is a home ground for some famous artists. Still, the structural differences in the industry have always been the focus of the musicians who first created music and falls on producers or music labels that seem vague when shared with those who deserve it (Rai, 2020). On YouTube, the most subscribed channel is T-Series, and it had around 188M subscribers in July 2021. It is an Indian music record label and is primarily known for Bollywood music soundtracks and Hindi-pop music (Wikipedia, 2021). Just from the number of subscribers of this Indian music channel, it can understand how the Indian music industry is popular among international netizens. Hence, the legislature should give more attention to the music industry and practical problems, which could cause a large impact on the country’s economy as well.

Artists have become more aware of such issues, and with the amendments made to the law, there have been some important developments to protect the rights of the artists who create such original works. In the case of India, the moral rights of a writer are at the heart of his work. He reserves the right to protect, preserve and nurture his works without regard to such copyright in whole or in part. The 2012 Amendment mainly fulfils this aspect, ensuring that artists receive awards in the form of royalties for their original works. Although this can be called a progressive step, the way forward does not seem to be clear, as the ambiguous wording of the provisions of Section 18 clarifies the payment of royalties but does not specify the entity liable for it, the party understands that the use of the services is liable to pay for it, but the assignments are misleading for their benefits (Rai, 2020).

Giving proper credit to an artist's work acts as fuel for him, which motivates him to do better because the incentive to run studios is not enough, and the income and achievements from the artist's work must be retained to motivate him. Giving copyright protection to his work protects his hard work from being infringed upon by infringing sources, and if violated, he has the power to resort to legal remedies and to prove that he was the first to create the work. An individual who enjoys unjust enrichment from others should not be allowed to benefit from it. Therefore, the author's right to receive royalties and benefits should be protected, and an author's work should be commercially exploited, and they should receive credit (Rai, 2020).

There is a need to amend the Copyright Act, especially to deal with remix versions of songs. Depending on the age of the remix, meet the needs of the owner or composer of the original song or the producer of the remix version of the song. It must recognise the importance of technology, provide solutions to the proper legal licensing system, and accurately determine the amount of royalties to be paid (Nath, 2020).

On 18^th July 2021, Malayalam YouTuber Ashwin Bhasker uploaded a music video on his YouTube Channel. The song was written, composed, and sung by him. The interesting part of the video is the song, and it is named "Copyright Claimed Song" (Bhaskar, 2021). He makes videos by doing cover versions of various popular songs. But he started getting copyright claims continuously for all his works, and it started affecting his earnings from YouTube. Finally, he wrote a song about copyright claims, and the lyrics go like this:

“Well, I couldn’t find a song to sing today

Cause everybody gives me copyright claims

So, be it, I’m going to write a song today

And nobody’s going to take it away from me

Been searching for a song through day and night

Just to make a video and make it live

But the copyright claim just jumps in the middle

Laughing at me, and you are done killing the vibe?

Don’t do me like that, don’t, don’t.”

From the lyrics of the song, it is well understood that how the musicians are struggling with copyright claims. On the other hand, it can also say that it is the right object of copyright laws, that is, to protect the existing works from every type of infringement as well as to promote and encourage new and independent works. Now the people and creators are much aware of the presence of copyright law, and they have been trying to avoid copyright claims in their works which is a good sign in the music industry. This will pave the way to new and original works and thereby encourage the youth to come up with fresh and unique ideas, resulting in the development of the country's entertainment industry.

*****

VI. References

• Abou Naja. (2021, June 24/06/). K-pop band BTS Fuels South Korean IP Economy. https://abounaja.com/blogs/k-pop-bts-boost-sout h-korea-ip-economy
• Bhaskar, A. (2021, July 18). YouTube. https://youtu.be/fYyk-9QNYAQ
• Chinaculture. (2012). Indian Music Industry Hails New Copyright Law. http://en.chi naculture.org/focus/focus/2012Copyright/2012-05/30/content_434703.htm
• Cleartax. (2021, January 05). Copyright A Song In India. https://cleartax.in/s/copyright-song-india
• Copyright Office, Govt of India. (2013). The Copyright Rules, 2013. https://copyright.g ov.in/Documents/Copyright_Rules_2013_and_Forms.pdf
• Copyright Office, Govt. of India. (1957). THE COPYRIGHT ACT, 1957. https://copyrigh t.gov.in/Documents/CopyrightRules1957.pdf
• Ducksters. (2021). Ducksters. https://ww w.ducksters.com/musicforkids/music_notes.php
• Indian Performing Rights Society Limited v/s Eastern India Motion Picture Association, 1977 AIR 1443 (Supreme Court of India March 14, 1977).
• Indian Performing Rights Society v/s Aditya Pandey, CS(OS) No.1185/2006 & IA No.11203/2016 (Delhi High Court April 05, 2018).
• Nath, K. (2020, October 18). Music Industry and Copyright Law in India. https://blog.finology.in/intellectual-property-law /music-industry-copyright-law-in-india
• Pathak, T. (2020, December 24). Laws Relating to Music Industry in India. https://legald esire.com/laws-relating-to-music-industry-in-in dia/
• Professional Book Publishers. (2021). Professional's Intellectual Property Laws Bare Act with Short Comments. Delhi: Professional Book Publisher.
• R.G Anand v. Delux Films, AIR 1978 SC 1613 (Supreme Court of India August 18, 1978).
• R.G Anand vs M/S. Delux Films, 1978 AIR 1613 (Supreme Court of India August 18, 1978).
• Rai, D. (2020, September 27). Creating value for music: copyright in music industry. https://blog.ipleaders.in/creating-value-for-music-copyright-in-music-industry/
• Srivastava, M. (2012, September 15). Music Industry in India: Economic and Legal Issues and Challenges. https://papers.ssrn.com/ sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2149853
• Wikipedia. (2021, March). Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/T-Series_(company)

*****