Recently, the Delhi High Court granted a compulsory license for the sound recordings owned by Phonographic Performance Limited (“PPL”) in response to a petition filed by Al Hamd Tradenation (“Petitioner”).
The Petitioner was organizing a corporate event for 50 attendees at a hotel in Delhi. During the booking process, the hotel informed the Petitioner that a music license from PPL would be required and quoted license fees of INR 49,500. Upon receiving the quotation, the Petitioner requested that PPL reduce the fee to 1/3rd of the license fees, given the small scale of the event. In response, PPL initiated a civil suit against the Petitioner, prompting the latter to file a petition seeking a compulsory license and determination of fair license fees, alleging that PPL charges arbitrary and unreasonable tariffs.
The Petitioner argued that PPL’s demand for exorbitant license fees effectively withholds access to musical works from the public. PPL, on the other hand, contended that it had not refused public performance of its works, but merely sought compliance by payment of license fees as per its publicly published tariff structure.
The Court noted that the Supreme Court of India is currently considering the issue as to whether PPL could be permitted to issue or grant licenses without being registered as a copyright society (Phonographic Performance Limited v. Azure Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., SLP(C) No. 10977/2025). It clarified that any directions issued by the Supreme Court would impact the present proceedings.
Importantly, the Court acknowledged that where there is a refusal to authorize public performance or republication of works, it has the authority to grant a compulsory license, subject to payment of compensation, which may be determined by the court. It also clarified that the availability of copyrighted works to certain members of the public does not preclude others from seeking compulsory licenses, particularly where the terms offered are unreasonable, which may amount to constructive refusal.
The Court compared PPL’s license fees with those charged by Recorded Music Performance Limited (RMPL), currently the only registered copyright society in India for sound recordings, and found that PPL’s tariffs are not aligned with market standards. It held that, given PPL’s extensive repertoire, it is under an obligation to offer licenses on fair and reasonable terms.
Accordingly, the Court directed that the Petitioner be granted a compulsory license for PPL’s sound recordings at a fair and reasonable tariff. Both parties were instructed to file affidavits of evidence to enable the Court to determine appropriate compensation, terms, and conditions of the license.
Al Hamd Tradenation v. Phonographic Performance Limited, C.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 8/2024, judgment dated May 13, 2025. Click here to read the judgement copy.