Music in India is a layered set of protected interests: the musical work (melody, harmony, arrangement), the lyrics (words), and the sound recording (the fixed recorded performance). Different people — composers, lyricists, singers, music producers and labels — can own different pieces of that bundle. For law students and practitioners it is essential to know how the Indian Copyright Act, 1957 allocates these rights, how performers’ rights were strengthened by amendment, and how courts have treated disputes between creators and record companies. This note summarises the legal framework, key statutory provisions, important case-law trends and practical drafting points for singers, lyricists and composers.

1. What is protected — statutory categories

The Act separates the core elements:

• Musical work — defined in the Act as “a work consisting of music” (this covers tune, arrangement, composition) and does not include the words intended to be sung; lyrics are treated separately as literary works. This distinction matters for ownership and licensing.
• Sound recording — the fixation of a performance (the “master” or recorded track). The owner of the sound recording commonly is the producer or record label that financed and organised the recording, unless contractually assigned otherwise.
• Performers’ rights — the Act recognises rights of performers (singers, instrumentalists, actors) including exclusive rights to make and authorise recordings and to receive royalties under the 2012 Amendment (Sections 38, 38A, 38B, etc.). These rights are distinct from the composer’s or lyricist’s copyright in the underlying musical/lyrical work.

2. Who is the “author” / initial owner?

• Composer and lyricist: Under Section 17 and related provisions, copyright in the musical composition and in the lyrics vests initially in the author(s) — i.e., the composer (for the musical work) and the lyricist (for the words). These authors can assign, license or sell their rights by written instrument (assignment provisions in Sections 18–19).
• Singer / performer: A singer who performs a work acquires performer’s rights in relation to that performance (economical and moral rights under the 2012 amendment). However, the recorded “master” is often owned by the producer/record label who finances and organizes the recording; the performer’s rights are in addition to the producer’s rights in the sound recording.

3. What rights does each stakeholder have?

• Composers (musical work): exclusive rights to reproduce, communicate to the public (including online streaming), adapt, and authorise the mechanical reproduction of the composition. Licensing the composition (sync, print, mechanical) is typically handled by publishers or performing-right societies.
• Lyricists (literary work): same exclusive economic and moral rights as other authors — reproduction, public performance (by virtue of use in a musical work), and the moral right to claim authorship and prevent distortion or mutilation. Moral rights survive assignments in Indian law.
• Singers / Performers: by virtue of Sections 38A/38B and related provisions, performers have exclusive economic rights to authorise recording, reproduction and communication of their performances and independent moral rights (to claim authorship and object to derogatory treatment). They also gain statutory entitlement to royalties when their recorded performances are commercially exploited.
• Producers / Record labels: usually own the copyright in the sound recording (master) as “producer” under the Act; this ownership gives the label the right to reproduce and distribute the recorded track and to exploit the master through commercial licenses. Courts have on occasion affirmed labels’ strong rights in sound recordings, sometimes to the practical exclusion of underlying authors when contracts assign rights to producers.

4. Key judicial trends

• Labels vs. authors/performers: Indian courts have often treated labels/producers as owners of the sound recording where the producer financed and organized the recording. In Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Performing Right Society (and similar disputes), courts considered the effect of assignments and commercial practice in resolving who can license what — emphasising documentary evidence of assignment/license and the producer’s role in fixing the recording. This has significant practical consequences: composers/lyricists may retain authorship of the composition/lyrics, but may no longer control exploitation of the master if rights were assigned to producers.
• Collective management and licensing: High courts have recently scrutinised licensing models and the role of collective management organisations. For example, recent Delhi High Court commentary (2025) clarified the role of copyright societies in issuing licences — a development that affects how public performance and broadcasting licences are obtained and who may legitimately issue them. Such developments are reshaping revenue flows to composers, lyricists and performers.
• Performers’ rights being enforced: Since the 2012 Amendment, Indian courts increasingly recognise performers’ moral and economic rights — enabling singers to claim royalties and preventing derogatory uses of their performances in some contexts.

5. Practical drafting and commercial tips

• Clear written agreements: For singers, composers and lyricists, the single most important protection is a clear written contract that specifies (a) who owns the musical work vs the sound recording, (b) royalty-sharing formulae (mechanical, performance, streaming), (c) moral rights (attribution and integrity clauses), and (d) termination/assignment mechanics consistent with Sections 18–19 of the Act.
• Register and document authorship: While registration is not strictly necessary to enforce copyright, registering works and keeping contemporaneous records (dated scores, demo files, agreements) helps establish authorship and original authors’ rights against later claims.
• Use collective societies wisely: Membership of a recognised performing-right society (IPRS, PPL, etc.) can help with collection and distribution of public-performance royalties — but artists should understand society mandates and exclusivity clauses before assigning rights. Recent case-law and court guidance emphasise careful compliance with statutory requirements for collective licensing.

6. Conclusion

Indian law recognises multiple, overlapping rights in music: composers and lyricists own the underlying works; singers and performers have statutory rights in their performances; and producers ordinarily own the sound recording. The 2012 Amendment strengthened performers’ economic and moral claims, and recent judicial scrutiny of licensing regimes is rebalancing who collects revenue and how. For creators, the safest route is careful contracting, clear assignment terms, and active participation in collective management — all underpinned by documentary proof of authorship and agreed royalty arrangements.

Selected references and primary sources

• The Copyright Act, 1957 (full text) — definitions and core provisions. (Copyright Office)
• Definition and distinction: “Musical work” and lyricist/composer rights. (IIPRD |)
• Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012 — insertion of Sections 38A/38B (performers’ exclusive and moral rights). (India Code)
• Analysis and case material on producers vs authors: Music Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. and related high-court commentary. (Lakshmi Sri)
• Recent Delhi High Court developments on licensing and copyright societies (2025). (BananaIP)