The brief facts are that the plaintiff, daughter of late O.P. Ralhan who produced seven films between 1963 and 1983, claimed rights over musical works forming part of those films. Her father had assigned rights to the predecessor of defendant no.2 by agreements executed in the 1960s and 1970s. After his death and probate of his Will, the plaintiff alleged that defendant nos.1 and 2 exploited these works beyond the period permissible under the agreements.
Procedurally, after notices and exchange of communications between the parties regarding royalty payments and scope of rights, the plaintiff filed the present suit in 2012 seeking injunction, damages, and accounts against the defendants for alleged copyright infringement. An interim injunction was refused by the Single Judge in 2012, issues were framed, evidence led, and the matter proceeded to final hearing.
The dispute centered on whether the original assignment of rights was perpetual and included exploitation by all mediums, or was limited to physical mediums like gramophone records, so that digital exploitation amounted to infringement.
In discussion, the court held that while the plaintiff’s pleadings focused on expiry of the time-limited agreements, her arguments later shifted to claiming the rights were limited only to physical mediums. The court found that the assignment agreements, particularly the 1967 agreement, used wide expressions such as “by any and every means whatsoever,” showing that the assignor had granted broad and perpetual rights to the assignee, which included exploitation by later-developed mediums.
The decision dismissed the suit, holding that the defendants had perpetual rights to exploit the works by any means and there was no infringement. It also upheld that defendant no.1 had lawfully used the song under licence from defendant no.2, and rejected the plaintiff’s claim for damages and accounts.
Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi.
