---

NEIGHBOURING RIGHTS (RELATED RIGHTS) – DETAILED ANALYSIS 

Neighbouring rights are special rights given to people who help in the creation or communication of a copyrighted work but are not the main authors.
These rights “neighbor” or “stand close to” copyright, hence the name.

In India, these rights are recognized mainly under the Copyright Act, 1957, especially after the 1994 Amendment and the 2012 Amendment.

---

1. Meaning of Neighbouring Rights

Neighbouring rights protect those who contribute to the expression, performance, and broadcasting of copyrighted works.
They do not create the work, but without them — the work cannot reach the audience.

These rights include:

(a) Rights of Performers

Given to singers, dancers, actors, musicians, comedians, and any person who performs.

(b) Rights of Producers of Sound Recordings

The person who makes and fixes the sound recording into a physical/digital medium.

(c) Rights of Broadcasting Organisations

Rights given to TV channels, radio stations, and digital broadcasters.

---

2. Performer’s Rights (Section 38, 38A, 38B)

A performer includes every person who performs in front of an audience — singers, actors, musicians, dancers, jugglers, acrobats, etc.

Performer’s Rights include:

1. Right to make audio/video recordings of performance
2. Right to broadcast performance
3. Right to reproduce the recording
4. Moral Rights (Section 38B):
   • Right to be credited
   • Right to protect the integrity of the performance

Term of Performer’s Rights:

50 years from the year of performance.

---

Important Case Law – Performer's Rights

1. Neha Bhasin v. Anand Raj Anand (Delhi High Court, 2006)

Facts: A singer took objection that her voice was used and edited in a remixed song without her permission.
Held: Court held that a performer has rights over her performance, and no one can distort or use the performance without consent.
Significance:
Reaffirmed moral rights and economic rights of performers under Section 38 and 38A.

---

3. Rights of Producers of Sound Recordings (Section 2(xx), 13, 14(e))

A sound recording is the recording of sounds regardless of medium (CD, MP3, streaming).

Rights include:

1. Right to make copies of the sound recording
2. Right to sell or distribute copies
3. Right to communicate the sound recording to the public (e.g., YouTube, FM, OTT)

Term of protection:

60 years from the year of publication.

---

Important Case Law – Sound Recording Producers

2. Gramophone Company of India Ltd. v. Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. (Delhi High Court, 2010)

Facts: T-Series used parts of old sound recordings without license.
Held:
Sound recording is independent copyright, and the producer has exclusive rights under Section 14(e).
Significance:
Reaffirmed autonomy of sound recording copyright separate from underlying works (lyrics, music).

---

4. Broadcasting Reproduction Rights (Section 37)

Broadcasting organisations include:

• Doordarshan
• All India Radio
• Private FM Radio
• TV channels
• Digital broadcasters (post-amendment)

Exclusive rights include:

1. Right to rebroadcast
2. Right to record the broadcast
3. Right to sell or rent recordings of broadcast
4. Right to communicate to the public

Term of protection:

25 years from the year of broadcast.

---

Important Case Law – Broadcasting Rights

3. ESPN Star Sports v. Global Broadcast News (Delhi High Court, 2008)

Facts: News channel used clips from cricket matches broadcast by ESPN.
Held:
ESPN had broadcast reproduction rights, and unauthorized use amounted to infringement.
Significance:
Strengthened protection of live telecast rights of broadcasters.

---

5. Why Neighbouring Rights Are Important? (Exam Points)

1. They protect contributions of performers, broadcasters, and producers.
2. They ensure creators get economic benefits and moral credit.
3. They prevent unauthorized use and piracy.
4. They balance rights between original authors and interpreters.
5. They align Indian law with international treaties like:
   • Rome Convention, 1961
   • WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT, 1996)

---

6. LLB Exam Writing Strategy

If the question is:

“Explain Neighbouring Rights under the Copyright Act, 1957.”

Write as:

• Definition
• Performer’s Rights (with sections)
• Producer’s Rights
• Broadcasting Rights
• Term of protection
• Case laws
  • Neha Bhasin case
  • Gramophone case
  • ESPN case
• Purpose and importance

Conclude with international conventions.

---

Below is a clear, LLB-exam-oriented, easy-language, 100% humanized detailed case-law analysis specifically related to Neighbouring Rights (Related Rights) under the Copyright Act, 1957.

I am giving 6 landmark cases with facts, issues, judgment, and significance — exactly how university answers should be written.

---

1. Neha Bhasin v. Anand Raj Anand (Delhi High Court, 2006)

Area: Performer’s Rights (Section 38, 38A, 38B)

Facts:

Singer Neha Bhasin performed a song in an album. Later, her voice was edited, mixed, and used in another version without her consent. She objected and argued that her performance was distorted.

Issue:

Does a performer have the right to stop unauthorized use or distortion of her recorded performance?

Judgment:

The court held that:

• A performer has exclusive rights over her performance under Section 38 and 38A.
• No one can record, reproduce, alter, or distort her performance without consent.
• A performer also has moral rights under Section 38B — the right to be credited and to prevent distortion.

Significance:

This case strengthened performer’s moral and economic rights and protected artists from unauthorized remixes or editing.

---

2. Gramophone Company of India Ltd. v. Super Cassette Industries (T-Series) (Delhi High Court, 2010)

Area: Rights of Sound Recording Producers (Section 14(e), 2(xx))

Facts:

T-Series used portions of old sound recordings belonging to Gramophone Company (HMV) without getting permission or license. HMV claimed infringement.

Issue:

Are sound recordings independently protected under copyright apart from lyrics and music?

Judgment:

The Court held:

• Sound recording copyright is independent and separate from the underlying works.
• The producer has exclusive rights to reproduce or communicate the sound recording.
• Using even a part of the recording without permission is infringement.

Significance:

This case confirmed that sound recording producers have full neighbouring rights, and their recordings cannot be reused without license.

---

3. ESPN Star Sports v. Global Broadcast News (Delhi High Court, 2008)

Area: Broadcasting Reproduction Rights (Section 37)

Facts:

A news channel used small clips of cricket matches broadcast by ESPN without permission, claiming it was for news reporting.

Issue:

Does using match footage by a news channel violate the broadcaster’s exclusive rights?

Judgment:

The Court held:

• Broadcasters have exclusive broadcast reproduction rights.
• Match footage is not “news” but copyrighted content.
• Taking clips without permission violates Section 37.

Significance:

Boosted protection of live telecast rights for broadcasters and limited unauthorized reuse during news reporting.

---

4. Super Cassette Industries (T-Series) v. Bathla Cassette Industries (Delhi High Court, 1998)

Area: Performer’s Rights & Sound Recording Rights

Facts:

Bathla Cassette copied devotional songs previously recorded by T-Series and used the same singer’s performance.

Issue:

Whether copying a performance recorded in a sound recording infringes performer’s rights AND producer’s sound recording rights?

Judgment:

• Court held both performer’s rights and producer’s rights were infringed.
• A performance becomes protectable once it is fixed in a sound recording.

Significance:

Clarified the overlap between performer’s rights and sound recording rights.

---

5. Indian Performing Rights Society (IPRS) v. Eastern Indian Motion Pictures (Supreme Court, 1977)

Area: Communication Rights & Producer’s Rights

Facts:

Music composers and lyricists claimed that film producers could not use their songs in cinemas without additional permission.

Issue:

Do producers get full rights in songs once incorporated into a film?

Judgment:

• The Supreme Court held that once music is made “part of the film,” the producer gets the right to communicate it to the public.
• The composer/lyricist cannot object later.

Significance:

This case is important for understanding how neighbouring rights operate in films and music distribution.

---

6. Taj Television v. Rajan Mandal (Delhi High Court, 2003)

Area: Broadcasting Rights

Facts:

Taj Television had exclusive rights to telecast World Cup cricket. Cable operators illegally aired the matches using unauthorized decoding equipment.

Issue:

Does unauthorized cable retransmission violate the broadcaster's reproduction rights?

Judgment:

• Unauthorized cable retransmission is infringement under Section 37.
• Broadcasters’ rights include the right to control communication to the public.

Significance:

Established that even cable piracy amounts to infringement of broadcasting rights.

---