Copyright Infringement Case Summary: Wynk Ltd & Anr V/s Tips Industries Ltd (2022)

Copyright Infringement Case Summary: Wynk Ltd & Anr V/s Tips Industries Ltd (2022). Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay
Corum: G.S. Patel and Gauri Godse JJ.
Date of Judgment: October 20, 2022
Citation: 2022: BHC-OS:9323-DB
Facts: 
This case involved a dispute between Tips Industries Ltd., a leading copyright owner of over 25,000 sound recordings, and Wynk Ltd., an online music streaming service owned by Bharti Airtel Ltd. Tips had initially licensed its repertoire to Wynk through Phonographic Performance Ltd. (PPL) under a written agreement that expired in August 2016. Negotiations to renew the license continued but were inconclusive. While Tips demanded that Wynk cease using its content, Wynk continued to exploit Tips’ sound recordings, providing services such as streaming, downloading, and offline listening to its users. Tips argued that such use was unauthorized and amounted to copyright infringement.
In defense, Wynk claimed reliance on Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957, which provides for statutory licensing. Wynk argued that its services fell under the scope of statutory licensing for broadcasting, which allowed them to use Tips’ repertoire. Tips disagreed, contending that Section 31D applied only to traditional broadcasting mediums like radio and television, and not to internet-based services like Wynk.
Issues:
The court considered the following legal issues:
1. Infringement of Copyright: Did Wynk’s activities, such as streaming and offline downloads, violate Tips’ exclusive rights under Section 14(1)(e) of the Copyright Act, 1957?
2. Application of Section 31D: Could Wynk invoke Section 31D of the Act to justify its use of Tips’ sound recordings for internet streaming and downloading?
3. Fair Use: Could the use of Tips’ repertoire by Wynk’s customers be categorized as "fair use" under Section 52(1)(a)(i) of the Act?
4. Nature of Stored Content: Did the storage of Tips’ sound recordings on customers’ devices qualify as "transient" or "incidental" under Section 52(1)(b) of the Act?
Judgement and Reasoning:
1. Copyright Infringement: The court held that Wynk’s download and offline storage features infringed upon Tips’ exclusive rights under Section 14(1)(e) of the Copyright Act. Wynk’s actions allowed users to store copyrighted sound recordings on their devices, which violated Tips’ right to communicate the recordings to the public. This activity exceeded any statutory licensing rights.
2. Application of Section 31D: The court clarified that Section 31D was intended for traditional broadcasting mediums, such as radio and television, and did not extend to internet-based services like Wynk. It emphasized that the legislative intent behind Section 31D was to regulate traditional forms of broadcasting and that it did not authorize internet streaming or downloading services. Consequently, Wynk’s reliance on this provision was found to be misplaced.
3. Fair Use: The court rejected Wynk’s argument that its use of Tips’ repertoire constituted "fair use" under Section 52(1)(a)(i). It reasoned that allowing users to download and replay Tips’ content was a core aspect of Wynk’s commercial business model, and such use could not be considered private or personal. Therefore, the defense of fair use was unavailable to Wynk.
4. Nature of Stored Content: The court also dismissed Wynk’s contention that the storage of Tips’ sound recordings on customers’ devices was "transient" or "incidental" under Section 52(1)(b). It found that the ability to store and replay songs offline was a primary feature of Wynk’s service, making such storage neither incidental nor transient. This further solidified the finding of copyright infringement.
5. Injunction: The court upheld the injunction against Wynk, restraining it from using Tips’ sound recordings without authorization. The judgment reaffirmed the rights of copyright holders and emphasized that statutory licensing provisions could not be misused to justify unauthorized exploitation of copyrighted material.
Conclusion
The judgment clarified that the statutory licensing provisions under Section 31D are limited to traditional broadcasting methods and do not apply to internet-based platforms. It underscored the importance of protecting the exclusive rights of copyright owners under Indian law, including rights related to copyright registration, and rejected defenses that attempted to extend the scope of statutory licensing beyond its intended purpose. This decision sets a significant precedent in the realm of Indian intellectual property law, especially in the context of digital content and online music streaming services, impacting areas such as trademark infringement and trademark registration as these platforms often utilize trademarks to brand their services and content.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay

Corum: G.S. Patel and Gauri Godse JJ.

Date of Judgment: October 20, 2022

Citation: 2022: BHC-OS:9323-DB

Facts:

This case involved a dispute between Tips Industries Ltd., a leading copyright owner of over 25,000 sound recordings, and Wynk Ltd., an online music streaming service owned by Bharti Airtel Ltd. Tips had initially licensed its repertoire to Wynk through Phonographic Performance Ltd. (PPL) under a written agreement that expired in August 2016. Negotiations to renew the license continued but were inconclusive. While Tips demanded that Wynk cease using its content, Wynk continued to exploit Tips’ sound recordings, providing services such as streaming, downloading, and offline listening to its users. Tips argued that such use was unauthorized and amounted to copyright infringement.

In defense, Wynk claimed reliance on Section 31D of the Copyright Act, 1957, which provides for statutory licensing. Wynk argued that its services fell under the scope of statutory licensing for broadcasting, which allowed them to use Tips’ repertoire. Tips disagreed, contending that Section 31D applied only to traditional broadcasting mediums like radio and television, and not to internet-based services like Wynk.

Issues:

The court considered the following legal issues:

1. Infringement of Copyright: Did Wynk’s activities, such as streaming and offline downloads, violate Tips’ exclusive rights under Section 14(1)(e) of the Copyright Act, 1957?

2. Application of Section 31D: Could Wynk invoke Section 31D of the Act to justify its use of Tips’ sound recordings for internet streaming and downloading?

3. Fair Use: Could the use of Tips’ repertoire by Wynk’s customers be categorized as "fair use" under Section 52(1)(a)(i) of the Act?

4. Nature of Stored Content: Did the storage of Tips’ sound recordings on customers’ devices qualify as "transient" or "incidental" under Section 52(1)(b) of the Act?

Judgement and Reasoning:

1. Copyright Infringement: The court held that Wynk’s download and offline storage features infringed upon Tips’ exclusive rights under Section 14(1)(e) of the Copyright Act. Wynk’s actions allowed users to store copyrighted sound recordings on their devices, which violated Tips’ right to communicate the recordings to the public. This activity exceeded any statutory licensing rights.

2. Application of Section 31D: The court clarified that Section 31D was intended for traditional broadcasting mediums, such as radio and television, and did not extend to internet-based services like Wynk. It emphasized that the legislative intent behind Section 31D was to regulate traditional forms of broadcasting and that it did not authorize internet streaming or downloading services. Consequently, Wynk’s reliance on this provision was found to be misplaced.

3. Fair Use: The court rejected Wynk’s argument that its use of Tips’ repertoire constituted "fair use" under Section 52(1)(a)(i). It reasoned that allowing users to download and replay Tips’ content was a core aspect of Wynk’s commercial business model, and such use could not be considered private or personal. Therefore, the defense of fair use was unavailable to Wynk.

4. Nature of Stored Content: The court also dismissed Wynk’s contention that the storage of Tips’ sound recordings on customers’ devices was "transient" or "incidental" under Section 52(1)(b). It found that the ability to store and replay songs offline was a primary feature of Wynk’s service, making such storage neither incidental nor transient. This further solidified the finding of copyright infringement.

5. Injunction: The court upheld the injunction against Wynk, restraining it from using Tips’ sound recordings without authorization. The judgment reaffirmed the rights of copyright holders and emphasized that statutory licensing provisions could not be misused to justify unauthorized exploitation of copyrighted material.

Conclusion

The judgment clarified that the statutory licensing provisions under Section 31D are limited to traditional broadcasting methods and do not apply to internet-based platforms. It underscored the importance of protecting the exclusive rights of copyright owners under Indian law, including rights related to copyright registration, and rejected defenses that attempted to extend the scope of statutory licensing beyond its intended purpose. This decision sets a significant precedent in the realm of Indian intellectual property law, especially in the context of digital content and online music streaming services, impacting areas such as trademark infringement and trademark registration as these platforms often utilize trademarks to brand their services and content.

Copyright Infringement Case Summary: Wynk Ltd & Anr V/s Tips Industries Ltd (2022)

Facts:

Issues:

Judgement and Reasoning:

Conclusion

Share this article:

Search more articles:

You may also like