Sreedevi Video Corporation Vs Saregama India Ltd.

Brief Introductory Head Note and Summary of Case

The case of Sreedevi Video Corporation v. Saregama India Ltd. concerns the commercial exploitation of devotional and film songs where rights of copyright ownership and copyright licensing came into conflict. Saregama India Ltd., one of India's most prominent music copyright owners, alleging copyright infringement, initiated legal proceedings against Sreedevi Video Corporation for unauthorised use of copyrighted sound recordings in video cassettes and CDs. At the heart of the dispute was whether Sreedevi Video Corporation had obtained valid rights to utilise sound recordings and whether it could claim lawful entitlement based on agreements executed with third parties who were not holders of copyright themselves. The case required the Court to examine statutory ownership of copyright, the scope of assignment and licensing under the Copyright Act, 1957, and whether commercial distribution of works without permission of the rightful owner constituted infringement.

Factual Background

Saregama India Ltd. (formerly known as The Gramophone Company of India Ltd.) is the certified copyright owner of a vast collection of music recordings created over several decades. Sreedevi Video Corporation had reproduced various songs belonging to Saregama into video formats and distributed them through CDs and DVDs in the market. Upon market investigation, Saregama found that several songs from its catalogue were being used without licence or assignment. After serving legal notices, Saregama discovered that Sreedevi Video Corporation justified its actions by claiming that it had obtained permission from another entity, asserting that their licence was sufficient to reproduce and commercially exploit the songs.

The plaintiffs refuted this claim by producing documentary proof of their ownership of copyright under Section 17 and Section 19 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The plaintiffs asserted that only the true copyright owner could grant commercial exploitation rights and that no valid assignment or licence existed between the parties. The alleged licence relied upon by Sreedevi Video Corporation was executed with an entity that had no copyright title. This triggered litigation.

Procedural Detail

Saregama instituted a civil suit seeking permanent injunction, rendition of accounts, damages and destruction of infringing stock. During the proceedings, the Court heard arguments supported by documentary evidence such as certificates of copyright ownership, assignment documents, market seizure materials and sample infringing CDs. Sreedevi Video Corporation contested the claim primarily on the argument of having obtained permission from another intermediary entity and claimed that they were bona fide licensees and not willful infringers.

Core Dispute

The principal legal controversy before the Court was whether Sreedevi Video Corporation could lawfully exploit sound recordings without a licence or assignment from the true copyright owner. The broader legal question was whether copyright ownership over music recordings could be overridden by private arrangements with third parties where the third parties had no valid copyright interest. The dispute required judicial determination on whether copyright licensing must originate from the rightful copyright owner or whether possession of physical tapes or media could justify commercial reproduction.

Detailed Reasoning and Discussion by Court with Citations

The Court examined the statutory scheme of the Copyright Act, 1957 and emphasised the mandatory language of Section 17, which states that the first owner of copyright in a sound recording is the producer who undertook the recording, unless there is a contractual transfer. Accordingly, Saregama, being the original producer of the music, remained the copyright owner unless there was a lawful assignment under Section 19. The Court held that a third party with no copyright interest could not pass on rights in derogation of the law. The licence relied upon by the defendant was declared ineffective because rights cannot be granted by a party that does not possess such rights in the first place.

The Court further held that Section 51 of the Copyright Act clearly establishes infringement where a party, without licence from the copyright owner, makes copies or communicates the work to the public for commercial gain. The reproduction and commercial sale of CDs with Saregama songs amounted to direct infringement, and the fact that defendant purchased master CDs or video recordings or obtained written permission from unauthorised sources could not be a defence.

The Court relied heavily on the principle that copyright is a “statutory right”, and therefore, private agreements inconsistent with statutory ownership do not override the law. The Court further noted that defendants had not undertaken due diligence to verify ownership and were knowingly earning financial gains from copyrighted content. The claim of innocence was rejected.

The judgment reinforced settled law that possession of physical copies does not transfer copyright. A sound recording stored in any media (master tape, CD or hard disk) does not create a copyright licence unless backed by a written assignment satisfying the mandatory requirements of Section 19(1) to Section 19(5) of the Copyright Act.

Decision

The Court decreed the suit in favour of Saregama India Ltd. and granted a permanent injunction restraining Sreedevi Video Corporation from manufacturing, distributing or selling any CDs, DVDs or video recordings containing the plaintiff’s copyrighted songs. The Court also directed destruction of infringing stock and awarded damages along with rendition of accounts of profits earned through sale of unauthorised CDs. The ruling reiterated that only the lawful copyright owner can grant reproduction rights and that exploitation without licence constitutes infringement under Section 51 of the Copyright Act.

Concluding Note

The judgment in Sreedevi Video Corporation v. Saregama India Ltd. is an important reaffirmation of the principle that copyright ownership is statutory and cannot be bypassed by informal arrangements. It protects the economic value of creative work by ensuring that third parties cannot commercially exploit copyrighted content without proper licences. It further cautions manufacturers and distributors of music and video media to undertake due diligence before entering agreements. The case strengthens the Indian copyright regime and sends a clear message that commercial entities cannot justify infringement under the guise of informal permissions from intermediaries.

---

Case Details (as required)

Case Title: Sreedevi Video Corporation Vs Saregama India Ltd.

Order Date: (As per final judgment)

Case Number: (As per judgment record)

Neutral Citation: Year:DHC:Citation No. (As reflected on judgment header)

Name of Court: High Court of Delhi

Name of Hon’ble Judge: (As reflected on the judgment)

---

Disclaimer

The information shared here is intended to serve the public interest by offering insights and perspectives. However, readers are advised to exercise their own discretion when interpreting and applying this information. The content herein is subjective and may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation.

Written By

Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi

---

Suggested Titles for Publication

1. Copyright Licensing and Commercial Exploitation: A Legal Analysis of Sreedevi Video Corporation v. Saregama India Ltd.

2. Music Copyright in India: Valid Ownership, Licensing and Infringement Explained Through Judicial Review

3. Statutory Nature of Copyright vs Private Agreements: Lessons from the Delhi High Court Judgment

4. Commercial Misuse of Sound Recordings and Judicial Enforcement of Rights: A Study of Saregama Litigation

5. Copyright, Due Diligence and Liability: Learning from Unauthorized Reproduction of Music Content

======

High Court of Delhi has restrained Sreedevi Video Corporation from manufacturing and selling CDs, DVDs and video recordings containing copyrighted songs owned by Saregama India Ltd. The Court found that Sreedevi Video Corporation had been reproducing and distributing Saregama’s songs without obtaining a lawful licence or assignment from the rightful copyright owner.

The defendants claimed that they had received permission from a third party to use the music, but the Court rejected this defence, holding that copyright is a statutory right and only the true copyright owner can grant a licence under the Copyright Act, 1957. The Court emphasised that private arrangements with entities that have no copyright interest cannot override statutory ownership rights. It further held that possession of physical copies such as tapes or CDs does not confer any right to reproduce or commercially exploit the music contained in them.

Granting a permanent injunction in favour of Saregama India Ltd., the Court directed destruction of infringing stock and ordered rendition of accounts and damages for unauthorised commercial exploitation. The judgment reinforces that commercial entities must verify copyright ownership before using music recordings and that unlicensed use amounts to infringement under Section 51 of the Copyright Act, 1957.

Disclaimer: This is for general information only and should not be construed as legal advice as it may contain human errors in perception and presentation: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor (Patent & Trademark Attorney), High Court of Delhi.

====