English | Telugu

Why did High Court rule against Ilaiyaraaja?

Ilaiyaraaja has been pushing for creative rights for his songs and has been filing cases against producers who use his songs without his consent. But, famous label company, Saregama, has filed a case in Delhi High Court, against the music maestro for not exploiting the 134 albums composed by him, licensed to them.


The High Court gave an injuction order restraining Ilaiyaraaja from using the songs from these albums. Earlier, the label went to Court as the copyright dispute grew out of proportion. Saregama alleged that Ilaiyaraaja began uploading tracks from his classic films to major streaming platforms like Amazon Music and JioSaavn.


The composer reportedly asserted personal ownership over these works, challenging Saregama’s long-standing claims. Saregama maintains that it holds exclusive, worldwide, and perpetual copyrights acquired through agreements with various film producers between 1976 and 2001.


Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that Saregama established a strong case, noting that under the Copyright Act of 1957, the producer is generally considered the first owner of music created for a film. The court's ruling now bars Ilaiyaraaja and his associates from using these sound recordings or issuing licenses to any third parties.


The court emphasized that allowing the composer to continue these activities could cause "irreparable loss" to the music label. This is not the first time these two entities have clashed. The court referenced a previous ruling regarding the iconic song "En Iniya Pon Nilave," where it was established that the copyright resided with the music label via the producer’s agreement.


This interim order serves as a temporary measure to maintain the status quo while the court examines decades-old contracts in the digital era. Ilaiyaraaja is required to file a response within 30 days, with the next hearing scheduled for April 2, 2026.


Disclaimer: The news article is written based on information shared by various sources. The organisation is not responsible for the factual nature of them. While we do try to do thorough research at times people could misguide. So, we would encourage viewers' discretion before reacting to them.