Calcutta High Court Upholds IPRS Authors’ Rights To Royalties From Ringtones And Caller Tunes

In a significant ruling for India's music creators, the Calcutta High Court has reaffirmed the right of authors and composers represented by the Indian Performing Right Society (IPRS) to receive royalties when their musical and literary works are commercially exploited through ringtones and caller tunes.

The judgment came in the case of Vodafone Idea v. The Indian Performing Right Society (2026), where the court heard a batch of appeals concerning the alleged unauthorised use of copyrighted content by telecom operator Vodafone Idea through its value-added services (VAS).

The dispute involved separate claims from music label Saregama and IPRS. Saregama sought to restrain Vodafone Idea from using its sound recordings for caller tunes and ringtones without authorisation, while IPRS sought an injunction against the telecom operator for publicly performing and communicating copyrighted musical and literary works without paying royalties to authors and composers.

Vodafone Idea argued that it had obtained the necessary rights through its agreement with Saregama and therefore did not require a separate licence from IPRS. The telecom company also relied on the Supreme Court's decision in IPRS v Eastern India Motion Pictures Association (1977), contending that the producer, as owner of the sound recording, controlled the embedded musical and literary works.

However, IPRS maintained that Vodafone's commercial exploitation extended beyond sound recordings and involved underlying musical and literary works, for which a separate licence and royalty payments were required.

The copyright society further argued that Saregama had not assigned these underlying rights to Vodafone and that the telecom operator's obligations towards IPRS were independent of its arrangements with the music label.

The court agreed with IPRS, observing that authors of underlying literary and musical works embodied in sound recordings are entitled to royalties whenever those recordings are commercially exploited. The only exception, the court noted, is when such works form part of a film being exhibited in a cinema hall.

While film producers may use sound recordings containing authors' works as part of a cinematic exhibition without additional royalty obligations, any other commercial exploitation—including through caller tunes and ringtones, would trigger the requirement to compensate authors and composers.

The ruling also took note of the Bombay High Court's decision in IPRS v Rajasthan Patrika (2023), which recognised the independent rights of authors and composers in underlying works.

The judgment is expected to strengthen the position of songwriters, lyricists and composers in India's copyright ecosystem by reinforcing their statutory right to royalties from commercial uses of their creations beyond traditional film exhibition.

For the music industry, the decision marks another important step in clarifying that ownership of a sound recording does not automatically extinguish the separate rights of authors and composers whose works are embedded within it.