The Role of Collective Rights Organizations in Protecting Music Copyright: A Case Study of IPRS in India

By Vansh Vyas

I. Introduction 

Copyright protection of music in the digital era has grown more intricate, and advanced mechanisms are needed to mediate between creators and users’ needs. Collective Rights Organisations (“CROs”) have then become pivotal intermediaries in the system, acting as mediators between copyright owners and those who aspire to use the protected work. CROs act as catalysts for simplifying licensing, minimising transaction costs, and paying fair prices to creators.

In India, the music industry makes significant revenue, with the Indian Performing Right Society (“IPRS”) being the nation’s leading collective rights organization for musical and literary works. Formed in 1969, IPRS has played a vital role in changing the music industry’s method of managing copyright and distributing royalties. The organisation recently recorded a historic feat by crossing INR 500 crores of collections for the fiscal year 2023-24, the highest distribution in its history. The value of collective management of rights has increased manifold with the proliferation of online platforms and streaming sites. IPRS has emerged as the fourth largest society in revenue terms in the Asia-Pacific region, where digital revenues constitute 74.2% of its overall collections. This success highlights the essential function played by collective rights societies.

II. Collective Rights Organisations

Collective Rights Organisations, or Collective Management Organisations (“CMOs”), are organisations that license and manage copyright-protected works on behalf of numerous rights holders. They are fundamentally different from commercial distributors or publishers, as they are more focused  on the collective good of rights holders rather than individual commercial gain.

The idea of collective management grew out of practical necessity. Single owners of copyright, especially in the music field, are faced with insurmountable difficulties in policing and licensing their material on so many different platforms and venues. A songwriter, for example, cannot reasonably expect to negotiate individual licensing deals with each radio station, restaurant, or digital platform that is interested in playing their music. CMOs solve this market failure by centralizing the licensing process. They keep track of when, where, and how works are utilised, negotiate tariffs and licensing terms with users, grant licenses in the name of their members, and receive payments from users prior to paying royalties to rights holders. This arrangement produces efficiency for creators and users alike as well as guarantees that copyright owners are paid adequate returns for their intellectual property.

The role of CMOs goes beyond simple licensing and collecting. They also pursue political advocacy for enhanced copyright protection, offer social and cultural support to creators, and perform a key role in de-risking the copyright business. By collectively managing rights and streamlining clearance, CMOs bring significant economic and cultural value to creative economies globally. 

III. The Legal Framework in India

India's copyright law is largely administered by the Copyright Act, 1957, that has been revised from time to time to maintain parallel with technological and industry developments. It safeguards original work, such as literary, musical, artistic work, films, and sound recordings.

Section 33, which was added by the 1994 Amendment, is the statutory pillar of collective rights management. It requires that license copyrighted works only registered copyright societies may do so. The 2012 Amendment fortified this with the addition of Section 33(3-A) that necessitates all registered societies at that time to register within one year of the amendment.

The 2012 Amendment also introduced important safeguards for authors and composers under Sections 18 and 19. These ensure that creators keep the right to royalties even when they sell their rights, preventing the historical stranglehold by big production houses and enhancing creators’ bargaining power.

The law also prescribes certain norms for copyright societies - only registered bodies can grant licenses to works; registration is provided by the Central Government for a term of five years with renewal facilities; and in general, only one society can be permitted per class of work in order to prevent conflicts and ensure better administration. These norms provide the structural framework for copyright societies such as IPRS to operate legally and efficiently.

IV. IPRS: A Case Study in Collective Rights Management

The IPRS is an interesting case study in collective rights management, exemplifying the possibilities as well as pitfalls of such entities in emerging economies. Founded on 23 August 1969, IPRS was formed as a non-profit company under the Companies Act and later registered as a copyright society under Section 33 of the Copyright Act, 1957.

IPRS’s history is an example of the changing fortunes of the music industry and copyright regime in India. Originally registered in 1969, the organisation did not have it easy in the pre-2012 period with court rulings strictly curtailing its rights to collect royalties for television and radio broadcasts. The 2012 Copyright Amendment was the turning point for IPRS, as the amendment acknowledged the separate rights of composers and authors, guaranteeing that they could get royalties even if their works were integrated into sound recordings or films.

IPRS’s membership has grown to 16,000 creators currently, a 20% rise in just eight months of FY 2024-25. The society works through exclusive assignment agreements where the members assign their rights to public performance to IPRS, thus allowing the organization to license such works and collect royalties on their behalf.

The financial performance of the organization reflects its increasing relevance in India’s music scene. In the year 2023-24, IPRS paid out more than INR 500 crores worth of royalties to members, with almost 12,000 members being paid royalties, which is 75% of the total number of members. By November 2024, IPRS hit INR 500 crores in revenue in merely eight months of FY 2024-25, which is its quickest pace so far.

The renewal in 2025 of IPRS’s registration certificate, to come into effect from November 28, 2022, for a period of five years, was of seminal legal importance for the functioning of the organization. The renewal upholds IPRS’s continued ability to grant licenses and collect royalties, thereby upholding confidence in the collective management system.

V. Key Functions and Operations 

IPRS performs a number of key functions that show effective management of collective rights. Its main mandate is to defend and assert the rights of its members—authors, composers, and publishers—by acting as their sole licensing agent for works of literature and music.

Licensing operations are a significant portion of IPRS’s operations. It gives licenses for different purposes, including public performance rights to various places like hotels, restaurants, and clubs, and broadcasting rights to radio, television stations, and online media. These operations are the backbone of IPRS’s revenue model.

Royalty collection and distribution is another important area. After deducting the administrative expenses, IPRS distributes collected royalties on a per-usage basis based on actual usage figures to ensure fair compensation. Digital platforms now contribute more than 70% of the total collections in light of the growing trend of streaming, mirroring the industry's shift to digital.

Technology has also become an indispensable part of IPRS’s operations. The implementation of ERP systems has aided internal operations and improved transparency in royalty pay-outs, making service delivery to members more efficient.

Internationally, IPRS has mutual agreements with 50+ international societies through which it can collect royalties on behalf of members whose material is used overseas. In FY 2023–24, the overseas collections exceeded ₹12.9 crores—a record figure that indicates IPRS's growing international presence.

VI. Challenges

IPRS has also encountered serious legal and regulatory challenges, which have been indicative of the intricacies of collective rights administration in India’s changing copyright regime. Compliance is a serious issue with low levels of compliance reported across the sector.

Perhaps one of the most significant legal conflicts was the ENIL case, where the issue involved whether or not broadcasters must obtain distinct licenses for underlying literary and musical material in sound recordings. The Delhi High Court ruling caused general uncertainty regarding IPRS's licensing jurisdiction. Conversely, the Rajasthan Patrika and Music Broadcast matters pending before the Bombay High Court upheld IPRS, elucidating that since the 2012 Amendment, broadcasting sound recordings to the public involves using underlying works—giving authors rights to royalties.

IPRS also suffered administrative losses, including when its registration expired in November 2022. While the retrospective renewal alleviated relief, the incident highlighted the procedural weaknesses of collective rights organizations.

Furthermore, the digitization of platforms brings with it recurrent legal concerns. Problems of metadata accuracy, automated content recognition, and cross-border digital licensing complexity are all unsettled under present legal systems, and need to be attended to forthwith for the proper enforcement of copyrights in a digital world.

VII. International Practices

The global system of collective management of rights provides important advice for maximizing IPRS. CISAC, with its representation in more than 120 countries, enables worldwide collaboration through mutual arrangements and best practices. 

Global CMOs are also setting best practices in adopting technology, applying blockchain, AI, and rights management technologies to enhance metadata management, usage tracking, and cross-border licensing. These best practices offer a blueprint for IPRS development in the digital age.

VIII. Conclusion

The IPRS case brings out the significance and challenges of collective rights organisations in safeguarding music copyright. Its development as a significant player disbursing more than ₹500 crores per year indicates the effect of successful rights management. Legal uncertainties, regulatory loopholes, and technical issues still await attention, though.

More transparent legislation, dedicated IP courts, and efficient procedures are needed. IPRS’s work in technology uptake and international collaborations enhances its position in the digital economy. Its emphasis on membership development, collections abroad, and member support indicates a vision for a balanced and equitable music economy, with other developing nations as an example to follow.

References:

1. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights, WIPO (last visited July 13, 2025), https://www.wipo.int/en/web/copyright/collective-management.

2. Indian Performing Right Society, Who We Are, IPRS, https://iprs.org/who-we-are/ (last visited July 13, 2025)

3. Indian Performing Right Society Ltd., Annual Report FY 2023–2024 (2024), https://iprs.org/wp-content/uploads/Annual_Report_FY2023_2024.pdf

4. IPRS Sustains Its Position as the 4th Largest Society by Revenue in the Asia-Pacific Region as per CISAC Global Collection Report 2024, Business Standard (Oct. 30, 2024, 10:31 AM), https://www.business-standard.com/content/press-releases-ani/iprs-sustains-its-position-as-the-4th-largest-society-by-revenue-in-the-asia-pacific-region-as-per-cisac-global-collection-report-2024-124103000010_1.html

5. World Intellectual Property Organization, Understanding Copyright and Related Rights 1 (2016),https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/855/wipo_pub_855.pdf

6. International Intellectual Property Alliance, The Role of Collective Management in the Licensing of Content, IIPA (Mar. 15, 2024),https://www.iipa.org/blog/the-role-of-collective-management-in-the-licensing-of-content/

7. The Copyright Act, 1957, Ministry of Education, Govt. of India (2021),https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/upload_document/CprAct.pdf

8. Rachit Garg, A Critique of the Provisions on Copyright Societies under the Copyright Act, 1957, SCC Online Blog (Mar. 14, 2018),https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2018/03/14/a-critique-of-the-provisions-on-copyright-societies-under-the-copyright-act-1957/

9. IPRS Receives Renewal Certificate of Registration Effective 28.11.2022: A Critical Development for the Indian Music Industry, IPRMENTLAW (Jan. 22, 2025), https://iprmentlaw.com/2025/01/22/iprs-receives-renewal-certificate-of-registration-effective-28-11-2022-a-critical-development-for-the-indian-music-industry/

10. Press Release, IPRS Sustains Its Position as the 4th Largest Society by Revenue in the Asia‑Pacific Region as per CISAC Global Collection Report 2024, Business Standard (Nov. 8 2023), https://www.business-standard.com/content/press-releases-ani/iprs-sustains-its-position-as-the-4th-largest-society-by-revenue-in-the-asia-pacific-region-as-per-cisac-global-collection-report-2024-124103000010_1.html

11. Severine Dusollier, Mandatory Collective Management of Copyright: When the Road to Deadlock Is Paved with Good Intentions, KLUWER COPYRIGHT BLOG (Feb. 9, 2022), https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2022/02/09/mandatory-collective-management-of-copyright-when-the-road-to-deadlock-is-paved-with-good-intentions/.

12. Anya Schiffrin, How Investigative Journalism Can Fight Disinformation and Strengthen Democracy, 19 Int'l J. Press/Pol. (forthcoming 2025), https://doi.org/10.1177/17480485251327398

13. Anya Schiffrin, How Investigative Journalism Can Fight Disinformation and Strengthen Democracy, 19 INT’L J. PRESS/POL. (forthcoming 2025), https://doi.org/10.1177/17480485251327398

14. George Robert Asewe, U.S. Copyright Inquiry: Impact on Collective Management Organizations, The Music Advocate Africa (Feb. 24, 2025), https://themusicadvocate.africa/u-s-copyright-inquiry-impact-on-collective-management-organizations/

15. What Is Intellectual Property Law?, Am. Pub. Univ. Sys., https://www.apu.apus.edu/area-of-study/security-and-global-studies/resources/what-is-intellectual-property-law/ (last visited July 18, 2025)

16. Unimarks Legal, Comparative Analysis of Copyright Amendments Upholding the Rights of Authors and Composers, UNIMARKS LEGAL (last visited July 18, 2025), https://unimarkslegal.com/comparative-analysis-of-copyright-amendments-upholding-the-rights-of-authors-and-composser/

17. ClearTax, License to Play Music in Restaurants, Hotels, Events and Other Commercial Places, https://cleartax.in/s/license-play-music (last visited July 18, 2025).

18. Metis Partners, What Is an IP License?, https://metispartners.com/ip-basics/frequently-asked-questions/what-is-an-ip-license/ (last visited July 19, 2025)

19. Licensing Executives Soc’y Int’l, SME Case Studies on IP Strategy and IP Management: Releasing Untapped Value, LESI (May 2021),https://lesi.org/article-of-the-month/sme-case-studies-on-ip-strategy-and-ip-management-releasing-untapped-value/

20. India - Protecting Intellectual Property, Int’l Trade Admin. (July 18, 2023), https://www.trade.gov/country-commercial-guides/india-protecting-intellectual-property

21. World Intellectual Property Organization, Copyright and Related Rights (WIPO Pub. No. 855(E), 2004),https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/copyright/855/wipo_pub_855.pdf

22. European Parliamentary Research Serv., The Cost of Non-Europe in the Sharing Economy (Study No. PE 558.762, Jan. 2016),https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2015/558762/EPRS_STU(2015)558762_EN.pdf

23. W. M. Cohen & D. A. Levinthal, Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation, 35 Res. Pol’y 128 (1990),https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048733306000631