IPRS, PPL, Novex: Who Collects for Indie Music

PPL became a registered copyright society again on 11 June 2026. What that, IPRS and Novex mean for an indie musician who owns the song and the recording.

Key facts

Two copyrights: A self-released song carries separate copyrights in the composition and in the sound recording
IPRS: Indian Performing Right Society administers rights in musical works and lyrics for composers, lyricists and publishers
PPL: Phonographic Performance Limited administers public performance and broadcast rights in sound recordings
PPL registration: PPL was registered again as a copyright society under Section 33(3) on 11 June 2026
Law: Public playing of recorded music is a communication to the public under the Copyright Act, 1957

An independent musician who writes a song and releases it herself owns two separate copyrights, even if she has never thought of it that way. One is in the composition: the melody and the words. The other is in the sound recording: the finished track. In India, different organisations collect money for each, one of them returned to the register only this June, and the courts have not settled all of it.

This piece sets out who is who, what changed in 2026, and what an artist who owns both layers can reasonably do. It is reporting on public documents, and it is not legal advice.

Two copyrights in one song

The law firm S.S. Rana and Co. put the distinction plainly in an article dated 31 August 2026. Playing recorded music in a bar, restaurant, hotel or event is a communication to the public under the Copyright Act, 1957. The rights are usually administered by organisations, not by artists or labels directly.

Per the firm's account, IPRS, the Indian Performing Right Society, administers rights in the musical work and lyrics for composers, lyricists and publishers. PPL, Phonographic Performance Limited, administers public performance and broadcast rights in sound recordings for record labels. Novex Communications also administers sound recording rights assigned to it by certain labels. Recorded Music Performance Limited, RMPL, is another recording-side body. A licence on one layer does not cover the other. The firm cites the Calcutta High Court's decision in IPRS against Vodafone for the point that a licence from the owner of the sound recording does not give rights in the underlying music and lyrics.

That is why one venue can receive two demands, both legitimate.

What changed on 11 June 2026

For several years the question was whether a private company could licence recordings at all without being a registered copyright society. Section 33 of the Act channels collective licensing through registered societies. In Azure Hospitality against PPL, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court held on 15 April 2025, on a prima facie view, that PPL, then unregistered, could not sidestep that framework, and indicated that it would have to licence at the tariff of the registered society for recordings, RMPL.

On 11 June 2026, according to S.S. Rana, PPL was registered again as a copyright society under Section 33(3). From that date, the argument that PPL cannot licence or sue for lack of registration is no longer available. The firm is careful about what that does not settle: use before 11 June 2026, the correct tariff, and the Supreme Court appeal in the Azure matter, whose interim orders bind only the parties to that case.

The Delhi High Court's judgment of 9 January 2026 in PPL against Pass Code Hospitality shows the situation in practice. The court kept an ad hoc licence fee arrangement running, noting that the question of PPL's ability to issue licences without registration was before the Supreme Court. Novex has never been a registered society, according to the same firm, and the Bombay and Madras High Courts have taken opposite views on whether it may licence in its own name.

None of this is a ruling on what an indie artist is owed. It decides who may knock on a venue's door.

What this means for an artist who owns both layers

Start with the song itself. IPRS accepts applications from authors and composers who have at least one published work. Its site lists a one-time application fee of 1,200 rupees for authors and composers, a provisional membership once documents are signed, and Board approval later endorsed at the annual general meeting. Members may register only their own works or works they are authorised to represent.

The recording side is a separate application. PPL says any individual, firm or company that owns or controls sound recordings, with the rights to communicate them to the public by performance and broadcast, can become a label partner. It asks for a preliminary KYC form and a repertoire upload, and says submission does not guarantee membership. PPL also states that what a member earns depends on how much their recordings are used by its licensees and on its distribution rules.

I could not find a published figure for what a typical independent act has received from either society, and I would not trust anyone who quotes one. The two tariffs are public, though, and they show where the money comes from.

Why live music is the clearest case

Live performance is where the composition right is least contested. In a judgment of 4 January 2021 in IPRS against Entertainment Network (India), the Delhi High Court rejected the claim that broadcasting a sound recording needs separate permission from the owners of the underlying music. It then said that where songs are performed live, even songs that also exist as sound recordings, a licence from IPRS is necessary. The judgment records that the defendants in the connected suit accepted that decree.

For a gigging songwriter this is useful. A promoter who stages your set, or a venue that books a cover band, is expected to hold an IPRS licence for the compositions performed. Whether the writer sees any of it depends on being a member and on the song being registered.

Where the money comes from

IPRS publishes tariffs, effective 1 April 2025, for its two best-known income lines. For streaming services, a free service pays 15 percent of a per-stream rate valued at no less than 10 paise, or 25 percent of its total content cost, whichever is higher, and a subscription service pays 15 percent of gross revenue. For bars, pubs, discos and lounges, the annual fee runs from 50,000 rupees for a small premises outside the major cities to 4 lakh rupees for a large one in cities such as Mumbai, Delhi and Bengaluru, covering background music and live or DJ music, with a 20 percent deduction for venues that host live performance every day of the year.

IPRS's live performance application form asks an organiser for the venue, the date, the capacity, whether tickets are sold and the highest ticket price, and for a declaration that the songs have been checked. That implies a paper trail that begins with an organiser and not with the artist. It also means that an artist who is a member has a reason to keep a set list for every show.

IPRS says it charges no fee for events declared as marriage processions or social festivities associated with a marriage, and issues a free licence to verify such claims. Marriage events, in other words, are not licensed for a fee by IPRS.

Two cautions

Two warnings follow from the sources. First, the societies exist because collective licensing is meant to be supervised, and the courts are still working out which one may charge whom. The Supreme Court may yet change the picture for periods before June 2026. Second, IPRS warns on its site that fraudulent or misleading works data can lead to termination of membership and forfeited royalties. An artist who plays covers, uses a sample or co-writes should register only what is hers, under her real name.

What this publication thinks

Indian independent musicians are told to distribute everywhere and wait. The licensing system is the part nobody explains. I think that is because it is dull and contested, and the history of this year is a good reason to read it anyway. With PPL registered again and IPRS long registered, both public-performance channels now stand on formal footing for an artist who owns her songs and her masters.

I would not call it a reliable income. I would call it a pair of applications worth making once a catalogue has a few released songs, and a reason to keep clean records on who wrote and who owns what. If a venue or a society sends you a demand, read it against the table above, and ask which layer it claims.

FAQ

What is the difference between IPRS and PPL?

IPRS administers rights in the musical work and lyrics for composers, lyricists and publishers. PPL administers public performance and broadcast rights in sound recordings.

Is PPL a registered copyright society?

Yes, from 11 June 2026, according to S.S. Rana and Co. Earlier periods and tariffs remain disputed before the courts.

Can an independent artist join PPL?

PPL says any individual or company that owns or controls sound recordings and holds the relevant rights can apply through a KYC form and repertoire upload. Acceptance is not automatic.

Do I need both IPRS and PPL as a songwriter who releases her own music?

They cover different rights, the composition and the recording. An artist who owns both may be eligible to apply to both. Check each society's terms and consider legal advice.