The document discusses remixes of music under Indian copyright law. It defines what a remix is and outlines the stages of growth of remix albums in India. Current copyright law allows remixes under Section 52(1)(j) if the remixer provides notice and pays royalties to the original copyright holder. However, this dilutes the copyright holder's rights and royalty amounts are often low. Proposed amendments aim to strengthen protections for copyright holders by extending protection to 5 years and requiring higher minimum royalties for remixes. The amendments also propose statutory licensing schemes and protecting author rights to royalties.

1. Remix Of Music: Copyright Implications In India BY: S.PARVADAVARDINI TRADEMARK DEPARTMENT ALTACIT GLOBAL

2. What is Re-mix of Music

3. Growth of Re-mix Albums in India STAGE 1 STAGE 2 STAGE 4 STAGE 3

4. What is A Musical Work?

8. Restrictions On Adaption of A Sound Recording

9. Prominent Case laws on disputes over Music Re-mix Super Cassette Industries Limited vs. Bathla Cassette Industries Pvt. Limited [2003 (27) PTC 280 (Del)]- A change of the singer in a vocal rendering is a change in the most vital constituent of a recorded song and cannot be done without the previous permission of the owner of the original recording as per the mandate of Section 52 (1) (j) of the Act. The voice is the soul and essence of a vocal rendering in a sound recording .Delhi High Court held that the plaintiff is not entitled to protection under Section 52(1)(j) of the Copyright Act 1957. Contd…….

10. … .. Contd Gramophone Company of India Ltd v. Supper Cassette Industries Ltd [1999 PTC 2 (Del.)]- The defendants after a span of twelve years released the version recording of an audiocassette with the same title. The defendants sent a letter to the plaintiffs acknowledging its copyright in the work and along with the said letter enclosed a cheque and notice that the defendants were making 5000 copies. The court held and emphasized that under the section, the person intending to make version recording has to take the consent of the copyright owner and issuance of notice was not sufficient to entitle the defendants to make the sound recording automatically.

11. … .Contd Gramophone Company of India Ltd v. Supper Cassette Industries Ltd (1996 PTC 16 252 Del)- The Court held that the Act permitted Version recordings but the defendant was not to use the inlay card or carton similar to that of the plaintiff. It was also directed that the defendant state it clearly on the cover of the work that it is a version recording and not the original work.

14. Aim Of The Proposed Amendments