Calcutta High Court rules Vodafone Idea cannot use songs as caller tunes without copyright society licence
The Calcutta High Court held that Vodafone Idea cannot commercially exploit copyrighted songs as caller tunes without obtaining licences from the relevant copyright society. The Court rejected arguments seeking to bypass collective licensing requirements and reaffirmed the statutory role of copyright societies in administering music rights. The ruling reinforces that telecom operators and digital platforms must comply with licensing obligations even for limited-duration music usage such as caller tunes and ringback services. The judgment is significant for India’s music industry, as it strengthens the bargaining and enforcement position of copyright societies. It also serves as an important precedent for digital exploitation of sound recordings and underlying musical works.
Read order here
Cinefil Producers Performance Ltd. Secures Delhi High Court Injunction Against Hari Om Retail Over Unauthorized Public Exhibition of Films
The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favour of Cinefil Producers Performance Ltd. (CPPL), restraining Hari Om Retail Pvt. Ltd., an electronics retail chain, from publicly communicating cinematograph films within its stores without obtaining a Cinematograph Performance Licence (CPL) from CPPL. The Court observed that the defendant was allegedly displaying films and audio visual content through televisions and internet enabled systems in its commercial premises for customer engagement and product promotion, thereby amounting to “communication to the public” under the Copyright Act, 1957. The Court took note of CPPL’s status as a registered copyright society under Section 33(3) representing over 750 copyright owners and a repertoire of more than 8,000 films. Importantly, the Court also relied on the terms of OTT and digital platforms like Amazon, which restrict usage to “personal, non commercial, private use,” holding that commercial exhibition in retail environments without statutory licensing prima facie constituted copyright infringement. Accordingly, the Court restrained the defendant from broadcasting or transmitting films from CPPL’s repertoire through cable, satellite, IPTV, smart displays, or digital transmission systems until requisite licences are obtained.
Read order here
Zee Music sues Nykaa over alleged unauthorised use of copyrighted songs in Instagram reel
Zee Entertainment has filed proceedings against Nykaa before the Delhi High Court alleging unauthorized commercial use of Zee-owned songs in promotional Instagram reels. Zee contends that while Meta may possess platform-level music arrangements for ordinary user content, such licenses do not extend to commercial advertising and branded promotional campaigns. The company reportedly seeks damages of approximately ₹1.7 crore and has identified multiple reels allegedly containing infringing music usage. Nykaa has reportedly removed the flagged content following initiation of proceedings. The dispute could become an important precedent concerning copyright liability for influencer marketing, branded content and social-media advertising campaigns in India.
Read order here
Zee Entertainment Moves Delhi High Court Against JioStar Over Continued Use of Licensed Works Post Expiry of Agreements
Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. has approached the Delhi High Court against JioStar India Pvt. Ltd. alleging continued unauthorized use of Zee’s copyrighted works even after expiry of licence agreements executed between the parties in 2017 and 2020. Zee contended before the Court that JioStar, as an ex licensee, was obligated under the agreements to immediately cease use and exploitation of Zee’s licensed works upon expiry or termination of the licences, and further alleged that certain content incorporating Zee’s works continued to remain available on JioStar’s platform despite repeated communications seeking discontinuation. JioStar, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged instances were residual and unintentional in nature, stating that substantial volumes of Zee’s licensed works had already been taken down and that any remaining instances would be removed upon identification. Taking note of the submissions, the Delhi High Court directed JioStar to ensure that it does not use, publish, broadcast, stream, upload or make copies of Zee’s licensed works within 15 days, while also referring the parties to mediation before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring an amicable resolution of disputes.
Read order here
Delhi High Court protects Arjun Kapoor’s personality rights
The Delhi High Court granted protection to actor Arjun Kapoor against unauthorised commercial exploitation of his personality attributes, including his name, image, likeness and other identifiable features. The Court restrained multiple online entities from misusing his persona for merchandise, AI-generated content and deceptive commercial activities. The order reflects the judiciary’s expanding recognition of personality and publicity rights in India, particularly in the digital ecosystem. The Court also acknowledged the increasing misuse of celebrity identities through deepfakes, manipulated content and unauthorised endorsements.
Delhi High Court restrains YouTubers from disparaging AI+ smartphones and its CEO
The Delhi High Court restrained certain YouTubers and content creators from publishing allegedly defamatory and disparaging content targeting AI+ smartphones and the company’s CEO. The plaintiffs argued that the videos contained false and misleading allegations capable of damaging commercial reputation and consumer confidence. The Court, while granting interim protection, observed that freedom of speech does not extend to publishing unverified allegations causing reputational harm. The matter highlights the increasing legal scrutiny of influencer and YouTube commentary in the technology and consumer-product space. The dispute also signals judicial willingness to intervene where digital criticism crosses into prima facie defamation or malicious disparagement.
Bombay High Court orders take-down of advertisement featuring Dhurandhar film character
The Bombay High Court directed the removal of an advertisement featuring a character associated with the upcoming film Dhurandhar, after the producers alleged unauthorised commercial exploitation of their copyrighted character and film-related intellectual property. The Court granted interim relief observing that the advertisement prima facie attempted to leverage the goodwill and recognition associated with the film without authorisation. The order reflects the broader trend of courts recognising character-based IP protection beyond conventional copyright in cinematographic works
James Cameron and Disney sued over alleged unauthorised use of teenager’s likeness in Avatar franchise
Director James Cameron and Disney are facing legal proceedings in the United States over allegations that the Avatar franchise used a teenage actor’s likeness without consent. The lawsuit claims that the claimant’s facial features and appearance were incorporated into a Na’vi character design without proper authorisation or compensation. The dispute raises important questions regarding likeness rights, consent requirements and the extent of protection available for facial identity in digitally created characters. It also reflects the growing legal complexity surrounding motion-capture technology and CGI-heavy productions. As AI-assisted visual replication tools become increasingly sophisticated, entertainment companies may face heightened scrutiny over consent and identity-based rights.
Shashi Tharoor moves Delhi High Court against AI deepfake videos
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor approached the Delhi High Court seeking restraint against circulation of AI-generated deepfake videos falsely depicting him making controversial political statements. The petition raises concerns regarding reputational injury, misinformation and misuse of synthetic media during politically sensitive discourse. The Court reportedly issued notice to social media intermediaries and the Union Government while considering interim relief. The matter further strengthens the emerging trend of Indian courts extending personality-rights protection into the AI and deepfake context. It also highlights the urgent regulatory challenges posed by generative AI tools in public communication.
Taylor Swift’s legal team calls “Showgirl” trademark lawsuit ‘absurd’
Taylor Swift’s lawyers have strongly opposed a trademark infringement lawsuit filed by former Las Vegas performer Maren Wade over Swift’s album title The Life of a Showgirl. Wade alleges that the title infringes her long-used brand Confessions of a Showgirl, which she has used for cabaret performances, podcasts and related entertainment services since 2015. Swift’s legal team, however, argued before the court that the comparison between a globally successful music album and Wade’s niche cabaret brand is “absurd” and incapable of causing consumer confusion. The defense also alleged that the plaintiff attempted to leverage Swift’s fame by aligning her own branding and social media content with the album after its announcement.
Bombay High Court removes “Paxil” trademark registration after prolonged non-use
The Bombay High Court granted relief to GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) by cancelling the trademark registration of “Paxil” held by Shreya Life Sciences, observing that the mark had remained unused for nearly two decades. The Court held that prolonged and unexplained non-use undermines the very purpose of trademark protection and may amount to trademark squatting. GSK argued that “Paxil” is globally associated with its antidepressant medication and that continued registration by a third party without genuine commercial use unfairly blocked legitimate proprietorial rights. The ruling reinforces the principle that trademark law protects active commercial goodwill rather than defensive or dormant registrations. The judgment is significant for the pharmaceutical sector, where brand identity and public association with medicinal products carry heightened commercial and consumer significance.
Zara denies trademark infringement in Jo Malone dispute with Estée Lauder
Fashion retailer Zara and its parent company Inditex have denied allegations of trademark infringement in proceedings initiated by Estée Lauder concerning the use of perfumer Jo Malone’s name on Zara fragrance products. Estée Lauder alleges that Malone, who sold the “Jo Malone London” brand to the company in 1999, is contractually restricted from commercially using her name in the fragrance business. Zara contends that its branding complies with previously communicated naming guidelines and does not mislead consumers into believing the products are associated with the Jo Malone London brand.
Major publishers sue Meta and Mark Zuckerberg over Llama AI training data
Five major publishing houses, including Hachette, Macmillan and McGraw Hill — along with author Scott Turow, have filed a class-action lawsuit against Meta and CEO Mark Zuckerberg alleging large-scale copyright infringement in training the Llama AI models. The plaintiffs allege that Meta knowingly used pirated books, journal articles and scraped copyrighted material without permission to develop its generative AI systems. The complaint further accuses Meta of removing copyright-management information and enabling outputs capable of reproducing protected content. Meta has denied wrongdoing and maintains that AI training may qualify as fair use. The case represents one of the most significant copyright actions yet against an AI company and may substantially shape future jurisprudence concerning AI training datasets and copyright law globally.
Mediation fails in Dhurandhar 2 copyright dispute over recreated “Oye Oye” song
Mediation proceedings between Aditya Dhar’s production team and Trimurti Films failed to resolve the ongoing copyright dispute concerning the recreated use of the iconic Tridev song “Oye Oye” in Dhurandhar 2. Trimurti Films alleges unauthorized exploitation of rights in the original composition and soundtrack, while the producers dispute infringement claims. Following unsuccessful mediation, the matter is set to proceed before the Delhi High Court. The dispute underscores the increasing frequency of litigation involving recreated songs, remixes and legacy Bollywood music catalogues. It also highlights the importance of securing layered rights involving lyrics, compositions and sound recordings before commercial exploitation in modern productions.
Delhi High Court’s blocking order against Pikashow continues to shape anti-piracy enforcement landscape
The Delhi High Court’s earlier order directing blocking of the streaming application Pikashow continues to be cited as a major anti-piracy precedent in India’s digital entertainment ecosystem. The Court had ordered blocking of the platform following allegations that it facilitated unauthorised streaming of copyrighted films, television content and sports broadcasts. The case strengthened judicial recognition of dynamic injunctions and intermediary obligations in combating online piracy. Rights-holders have increasingly relied on similar blocking mechanisms to restrain mirror websites and rogue streaming applications. The continuing relevance of the Pikashow litigation demonstrates the judiciary’s increasingly interventionist approach toward digital piracy and unauthorised streaming platforms in India.
