The Unfolding Symphony of Rights: How Copyright is ReshapingIndia’s Music Industry from Gramophones to NFTs

By Ujwal S Uday

With technology’s constant advancement, the music industry is a dynamic, ever-evolving stage. The history of music is nothing short of remarkable, spanning from the tactile presence of cassette tapes and the nostalgic crackle of gramophones to the pervasiveness of digital streaming and the ground-breaking adoption of Web3 innovations like blockchain and Non-Fungible Tokens (“NFTs”). Copyright law, a key component of Intellectual Property (IP) rights that actively protects musical innovation, is at the centre of this dynamic movement. The complex legal structures governing the ownership and usage of music have changed along with how we produce, share, and listen to it. This article traces India’s distinctive trajectory through this shifting landscape, examining how copyright law has both influenced and been influenced by the country’s growing music industry, while highlighting its broader legal significance and real-world impact. At its core, music transcends boundaries and generations with ease and is a powerful medium for expression, storytelling, and cultural preservation. But underneath its creative force comes a  much regimented legal and business environment. The original Indian music copyright plan was created at a time when radio broadcasts, gramophones, and sheet music were the mainstays. Protections for “sound recordings” (Section 2(xx)) and “musical works” (Section 2(p)) were established by the Copyright Act, 1957, which closely mirrored British law. This ground breaking law gave authors the sole authority to reproduce, distribute, and perform their works in public. But enforcement was noticeably lax in those early days. It was normal practice to transmit music without authorisation, play live without the required licenses, and reproduce recordings without authorisation. With little to no knowledge of residual royalties or the subtleties of licensing and rights management, many artists frequently only earned one-time payments. This crucial void was filled by the rise of copyright organisations like the Phonographic Performance Limited (“PPL”) and the Indian Performing Right Society (“IPRS”), which took on the crucial responsibilities of overseeing performance licenses, collecting royalties, and defending the rights of artists. In Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak (2008), Justice Krishna Iyer wisely said that “authors’ economic rights must be protected in a way that permits the work to circulate freely”.

A revolution in digital technology began in the late 1990s and early 2000’s. MP3s and peer-to-peer websites like Napster led the music industry’s shift from tangible formats to readily downloaded files. With songs easily shared over Bluetooth and USBs or readily downloaded from websites like Songs.pk, India was hit by a wave of widespread piracy. India responded by passing the Copyright (Amendment) Act, 2012, which made historic reforms. This legislative amendment marked a turning point in India’s copyright framework, introducing several crucial reforms aimed at strengthening the rights of music creators. Notably, Section 18 was amended to prevent authors and composers from entirely relinquishing their rights through assignment, thereby ensuring they retain a perpetual stake in their works. Section 31C introduced the concept of statutory licensing for the broadcast of sound recordings, creating a structured legal mechanism for public access while safeguarding the interests of rights holders. Equally significant was the revision of Section 19, which guaranteed the continued payment of royalties to lyricists and composers, formally recognising the enduring value of their creative contributions across time and platforms

At the same time, the world’s music market shifted towards legitimate streaming services like YouTube Music, Apple Music, and Spotify. On the basis of per-stream revenues based on user analytics, these platforms unveiled new licensing arrangements. Scholars like Jane C. Ginsburg contend that “the digital revolution has democratised music distribution, but copyright law must ensure that creators are not left behind” because, regardless of democratising distribution, these micropayments frequently failed to give artists a steady income.

I. From Fans to Stakeholders: How NFTs and Blockchain Empower Artists

Web3 is the most recent and maybe most innovative stage in the history of music. It is distinguished by its dedication to decentralisation, transparency, and direct artist control. NFTs, distinct cryptographic tokens that safely confirm ownership of digital assets, are at the forefront of this revolution. Music NFTs are fundamentally rethinking ownership; they are not only a fad. Music NFTs offer diverse and innovative forms of value and access that are reshaping how artists engage with their audiences. They can confer ownership over individual audio tracks or entire albums, granting fans a tangible stake in the music itself. In addition, NFTs often serve as gateways to exclusive experiences—such as private performances, unreleased behind-the-scenes content, or limited-edition digital memorabilia—deepening the connection between creators and their supporters. Some NFTs are also tied to collectible visual art that complements the music release, enhancing the overall artistic offering. Perhaps most significantly, they can entitle holders to a share in future royalties, creating a novel and potentially sustainable income stream for artists in the digital age. The 2021 release of Kings of Leon’s album When You See Yourself as an NFT, which brought in over $2 million, is a noteworthy illustration of this breakthrough. Platforms like FanTiger and CalyxNFT are already investigating comparable models in India, indicating the technology's early acceptance. Blockchain-powered smart contracts are essential to the Web3 concept. Without the need of conventional middlemen, these self-executing contracts may automatically pay royalties each time a token is exchanged, guaranteeing clear and instantaneous recompense. Artists now have the hitherto unheard-of power to include resale clauses in the contract itself, guaranteeing them ongoing income from subsequent sales of their creations. However, the lack of independent legal recognition for such contracts is now a major obstacle in India's legal system. According to the Indian Contract Act of 1872, a smart contract still has to follow the conventional rules of ability, consent, and legitimate compensation in order to be enforceable. In NUJS Law Review (2022), Ramesh Kumar makes the observation that “In India, the absence of explicit recognition of smart contracts and NFTs means creators may lack enforceable rights”. There is a great deal of ambiguity for artists who want to use these new technologies because of this legal void.

Where Law Meets Innovation: Legal Hurdles in the Age of Web3 Music

The music industry faces new legal challenges as a result of blockchain's decentralised and international character. Numerous intricate legal issues that require immediate consideration have been brought up by the incorporation of NFTs into the music business. The main problem is jurisdictional uncertainty. For example, it becomes extremely difficult to identify the proper jurisdiction, relevant legal framework, and method of action if a music NFT is created in Dubai yet violates the rights of an Indian artist. This is mostly because existing copyright rules are territorial in character and cannot adequately handle the decentralised, global nature of digital goods. The spread of fraud and illegal minting is another urgent issue.

More and more NFTs with music material are being produced and marketed without the original authors' knowledge or approval. On websites like OpenSea, even well-known musicians like Eminem and The Weeknd have been the targets of these kinds of violations. Because NFT platforms function anonymously and without centralised monitoring, it is sometimes impossible to track down offenders or properly enforce rights, which makes legal remedies in these circumstances insufficient.

Furthermore, overlapping intellectual property rights are frequently involved in NFTs, which makes legal protection even more difficult. A single NFT may use personality, trademark, and copyright rights all at once. For instance, an artist's distinctive voice or likeness may give rise to the right of publicity, while record artwork may be protected by both copyright and trademark law. Furthermore, in accordance with Section 57 of the Act, unapproved remixes or mashups may violate the artist's moral rights in addition to copyright. To guarantee that artists' rights are completely protected in the digital era, this complex, multi-layered IP landscape calls for sophisticated legal interpretation and enforcement tactics. The groundwork is being laid, even though India has not yet seen any historic lawsuit concerning music NFTs. FanTiger and other platforms have started collaborating with local musicians to tokenise music rights. Artists, however, are faced with a great deal of confusion around the assignment of rights and open revenue monitoring in the lack of clear regulatory and legal advice. On a global scale, inventions are developing quickly. The “Music Royalty NFTs” offered by the UK-based platform Opulous enable fans to invest in songs and get a share of the royalties. Eminem and Snoop Dogg’s Bored Ape NFT avatar performances at the 2022 MTV Video Music Awards demonstrated the growing convergence of performance art and cryptocurrency. Music platforms based on the metaverse are attracting the attention of major labels such as Warner Music Group and Universal. 

Empowering artists and fostering a transparent, equitable music ecosystem in India requires bold and forward-thinking legal and institutional reforms. A crucial starting point is the modernisation of the country’s copyright framework to formally acknowledge digital ownership and resale rights—especially in light of evolving technologies like NFTs. The legal regime must establish clear guidelines for licensing, royalty distribution, and accountability in cases involving smart contract violations or unauthorised minting. Simultaneously, there is a pressing need to introduce a comprehensive regulatory infrastructure specifically tailored to NFTs. Whether implemented under the existing Information Technology Act, 2000 or through a dedicated legislative instrument, such a framework should include safeguards against unauthorised NFT creation, require on-chain registration of rights-related metadata, and mandate automated royalty disbursements to creators upon secondary sales. Together, these reforms would lay the foundation for a more inclusive and sustainable future for Indian music.

An equally critical step toward reform lies in revamping the system of collective rights management. Institutions such as the IPRS and PPL must leverage blockchain technology to introduce greater transparency and accountability in royalty distribution. Implementing real-time, user-friendly dashboards that allow artists to monitor their earnings would go a long way in restoring trust—something that has been steadily eroded under traditional rights management frameworks. Another foundational yet often overlooked issue is the pervasive lack of intellectual property awareness among Indian musicians, particularly those working in regional, rural, or vernacular contexts. Addressing this gap demands coordinated efforts involving government bodies, legal institutions, and music academies. Through nationwide campaigns focused on IP literacy, accessible legal support, and the establishment of dedicated licensing assistance centres, stakeholders can help artists navigate the complexities of rights ownership. Collectively, these reforms can secure the rights of creators and redefine the future of India’s music industry in the digital age.

II. The Next Movement in the Symphony

The story of copyright in the music industry is, at its core, one of constant reinvention and enduring aspiration. From the mechanical rhythms of gramophones to the limitless expanse of digital streaming—and now to the uncharted terrain of Web3—the legal architecture surrounding music has evolved in tandem with every major technological shift. Blockchain and NFTs offer a compelling promise: the chance to return control to artists, eliminate exploitative middlemen, and build a more equitable compensation framework. Yet, the true potential of these innovations can only be realised if supported by clear legal principles and forward-looking regulation. Without such foundations, the disruptive power of Web3 may merely reproduce the very inequalities it seeks to resolve. India, with its rich musical legacy and rapidly digitising economy, now finds itself at a decisive crossroads. By boldly reforming its legal framework, equipping artists with the tools and knowledge to protect their rights, and embracing technological innovation with purpose and vision, the nation has the opportunity to lead a transformative era in global music law. This is not simply a matter of legislative change—it is a call to ensure that creators, the soul of the industry, are finally afforded the recognition and rewards they have long deserved.

References:

1. Copyright Act, § 14, No. 14, Acts of Parliament, 1957 (India).

2. Copyright (Amendment) Act, § 3, No. 27, Acts of Parliament, 2012 (India).

3. Eastern Book Co. v. Dindian.B. Modak, (2008) 1 SCC 1.

4. Indian Performing Right Society Ltd. v. Aditya Pandey, (2012) 198 DLT 537.

5. Kings of Leon’s NFT Album Release, Rolling Stone (Mar. 2021).

6. IFPI, Global Music Report 2024.

7. World Economic Forum, NFTs and the Future of Creative Ownership (2023), https://www.weforum.org/whitepapers/nfts-and-the-future-of-creative-ownership/.

8. Opulous, Music Royalty NFTs, https://www.opulous.org.