From Sabha to Virtual Streaming: Intellectual Property Concerns in Contemporary Carnatic Music

By- Rohaan Thyagaraju V

Abstract

The digital transformation of Carnatic music from intimate cultural environments to algorithm-driven music streaming services has altered the structural, legal, and economic systems that govern the classical music traditions of India. This article will examine why the current intellectual property framework does not provide sufficient coverage for a genre of art such as Carnatic music, which is characterised by its communal nature, improvisation, and performer-centric creativity. As the Indian Copyright Act addresses statutory recognition for both authors and performers through Sections 13, 14, 38A, and 38B, the legal framework is designed for fixed music compositions of a commercial nature.

The emergence of alternative formats has created additional complexities regarding authorship, ownership, consent, and the commercial exploitation of artistic expression. Unauthorised sound recordings of live performances posted to music streaming services such as YouTube often result in the performance being monetised without recognition or compensation to the performer.   Furthermore, archival recordings of historical performances are increasingly being commodified and separated from the cultural tradition of creating culture by corporations. In addition to the creation of legal ambiguities arising from the emergence of new technologies, the traditional conceptualisation of compilation rights is being challenged by machine learning systems that generate copyright/artistic rights in violation of current copyright laws. The paper argues that to protect the future of Carnatic music, intellectual property (IP) legislation must move away from traditional definitions of authorship toward a hybrid concept that protects both the individual artistry of performers and the collective cultural legacy from which they draw.

Keywords:  Carnatic Music; Performers' Rights; Copyright Law; Digital Streaming; Traditional Cultural Expressions

Introduction

Carnatic music is South India's oldest classical music tradition, embellished by the devotional and cultural values^[1] performed in temples and sabhas. Unlike contemporary commercial music, which comprises fixed, copyright-protected pieces, many Carnatic compositions have been handed down from generation to generation and hold a strong connection between the creative response through the reinterpretation of original compositions and the creative artist's work in the Carnatic music paradigm.

In terms of distribution and access, digitisation makes it easier to share and access Carnatic music, including live concert streaming on social media and on several digital music streaming platforms, as well as recorded audio or video files. Not only does digital access to Carnatic music enable musicians to reach their audiences more easily, but it also supports the preservation of Carnatic music's culture. However, Carnatic musicians continue to face issues related to copyright infringement, commercial exploitation, and illegal recording, and they have no legal recourse for these violations.

The Copyright Act, 1957, provides for composers and performers^[2] under various sections (13, 14, 38, 38A, 38B). Yet, the complexity of applying and interpreting copyright law in the context of the traditional collaborative art form, such as Carnatic music, has proved problematic. The transition from live performances in halls to the digital dissemination of Carnatic music raises serious questions about who owns the art form, who has creative control over the works, and whether these works are being preserved for future generations.

I. Authorship and Ownership in Carnatic Music:

a)    The Evolution of a Collective Tradition, Along with the Contrasting Laws

Over several centuries, many generations have contributed to what is now known as Carnatic music. Great composers like Tyagaraja, Muthuswami Dikshitar and Syama Sastri^[3], whose music has been performed for hundreds of years, were important in shaping Carnatic music; however, their music was also written long before today's copyright standards existed. As such, many of the works created by these composers do not have modern copyright attached to them, making it difficult to apply current copyright law to them, as the author of the original work is considered the author when granting copyright protection.

In contrast to modern commercial musical works, Carnatic performances^[4] typically utilise traditional lyric structures and distinctive interpretations. Therefore, establishing ownership over a particular performance can be extremely difficult. Many performances have a dual existence from a community perspective and from an artist's perspective, resulting in a conflict between public access and the individual's rights to the performance (public vs. private rights).

b)    Creative improvisation

Improvisation, or manodharma^[5], is one of the defining features of Carnatic music and is expressed through various forms, such as raga alapana, niraval, and kalpana swaras. It typically happens spontaneously and is mathematically specific to the performer. The Indian copyright law does not clarify whether there is an independent legal mechanism to protect works resulting from improvisational creativity. Under sections 13 and 14 of the Copyright Act, musical works and sound recordings are recognised. 

However, live performance improvisation lacks adequate legal protection. Often, performances are recorded and uploaded to the Internet without the performer's consent. As a result, the musician has limited control over how their performance can be reproduced or commercially exploited.

II. Performers' Rights under Indian Copyright Law

a) Statutory Protection for Performers

In 2012, the Copyright (Amendment) Act ^[6]enhanced performers' rights in several significant respects, especially the right of a performer to grant permission for the reproduction, distribution, or public performance of their work, by introducing sections 38A and 38B. The act also grants a performer moral rights (protection against any alteration or exploitation).

Most performances are recorded for distribution, and someone who distributes a recording of a Carnatic musician's performance without the performer's permission might be infringing the copyright of the performer. This is particularly complicated by the informal nature of many recordings made at cultural festivals and sabhas, making enforcement of these rights difficult. In addition, many performers, especially Carnatic musicians, are not sufficiently informed about licensing agreements and digital ownership; as a result, enforcement of the performers' rights^[7] established by statute is often ineffective.

b) Judicial Recognition of Musical Rights

Performers' rights in India are gradually being recognised, and Indian Courts are expanding the ways in which performers' rights can be protected. For example, in the case of the Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd vs Eastern Indian Motion Picture Association, the Supreme Court was asked to determine the ownership and copyright of music compositions. While the decision concerned music in films, it is also of considerable value in determining ownership of the authorship of musical works performed by performers. The fact that the Delhi High Court, in the case of Neha Bhasin v Anand Raj, 2006, also determined that performers not only have property rights over their performances but also have the same rights as any other owner of musical works is significant. While neither of these decisions relates directly to Carnatic music, both establish significant legal principles that will assist classical musicians to prove infringement arising from the creation of digital recordings of their performances.

III. Digital Platforms and Emerging Challenges

a) Unauthorised Streaming and Commercial Exploitation

Through digital platforms, the audience for Carnatic music has certainly expanded, as concert performances uploaded to popular streaming services like YouTube now reach a global audience. Unfortunately, unauthorised recordings of performances^[8] by audience members and third-party entities ensue, which are then monetised through advertising or subscription services.

Live performers^[9] at concerts receive neither credit nor payment ^[10]for the digital engagement generated by their shows. Still, audience members' digital engagement provides greater visibility for these artists within the music community.

Additionally, artists who do not want to receive professional credit for their music often ignore the number of times their music is distributed without consent by the public, thereby validating the infringement of all artists within the classical music ecosystem. To complicate matters further in determining ownership rights in disputes over recordings of performers, contractual relationships between organisers and performers are insufficiently standardised.

b) AI and Archival Issues

AI creates new intellectual property issues^[11] for classical musicians as well. AI systems trained on archived recordings can mimic certain aspects of an artist's vocal stylings, compositional structures, or performance patterns without that artist's written permission. Current copyright laws do not adequately address the use of machine learning models in traditional artistic archives.

Another factor raising questions of cultural custodianship and equity when it comes to access to digitised archival recordings is that digitised archival recordings held by private collectors or streaming platforms are being commercially exploited as "historical performances," without the artist having had any meaningful role in the process. If classical traditions are treated as extractive digital commodities rather than as cultural heritage deserving of protection, the value of those keywords will decline dramatically.

IV. Towards a Balanced Legal Framework

The legal framework around Intellectual Property (IP) in India must evolve to reflect the realities of classical performance traditions. One way to assist in distributing royalties fairly and to enforce against unauthorised internet dissemination of classics is to have a collective licensing scheme for classical musicians. Another important area for institutional reform^[12] is the implementation of formal agreements between Sabhas and cultural institutions regarding the recording rights of musicians and the manner in which revenue will be shared.

However, equally important is that all classical musicians are educated about their statutory rights under the Copyright Act, as statutory copyright protection is essential to their ability to effectively challenge exploitation in the digital space.

Without this knowledge, performers' effectiveness in challenging exploitation in the digital environment is limited. Excessive privatisation of performers' rights could negatively impact Carnatic music, which already exhibits characteristics of both artistic labour and communal cultural heritage^[13]. Consequently, Intellectual Property Law should be designed with sensitivity to ensure the protection of performers' rights whilst guaranteeing ongoing public access to Classical traditions. The current discussions at WIPO on Traditional Cultural Expressions^[14] may yield useful models for reform in India.

Conclusion

The transformation of Carnatic music's performance^[15] from concert halls in front of live audiences to the sharing of the music through digital streaming is changing the way culture interacts with technology and law. The digital distribution of this music makes it more accessible and easier to preserve; however, it also creates the opportunity for unauthorised reproduction and commercial use of the musicians' artistic work. Copyright law currently provides some protection to artists via performers' rights and moral rights. However, there are still many gaps in the protection offered, particularly regarding improvisational creativity, ownership of content in the digital space, and AI-generated reproductions of the artists' performances.

As the classical music scene continues to transition into a commercial digital ecosystem, intellectual property law will need to expand beyond the existing rigid notions of authorship to create new frameworks that recognise both collective cultural inheritance and individual artistic contributions, thereby continuing to protect Carnatic musicians. Today, protecting Carnatic musicians requires increased enforcement through strong legal action; institutional reforms that provide a structure within which musicians can work; mechanisms of accountability for digital content creators; and a commitment to maintaining and preserving the richness of India's culture.

^[1]“Carnatic Music in a Glance”, Spardha School of Music, available at: Spardha School of Music (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[2] “Rights of Performers under Copyright Law”, The Legal School, available at: The Legal School 

^[3]“The Trinity of Carnatic Music”, Artium Academy, available at: Artium Academy (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[4]“TISMIR Article”, Transactions of the International Society for Music Information Retrieval, Vol. 4, available at: Transactions of the ISMIR (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[5]“Manodharma: The Art of Improvisation in Carnatic Music”, Raga Rasa, available at: Raga Rasa (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[6]“Impact of 2012 Amendments to Copyright Act on Performers’ Rights”, Law Matters, available at: Law Matters (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[7] K. D. Raju, “Copyright and Challenges Facing the Music Industry in India”, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 17(4) (2012): 324–334, available at: NIScPR PDF Archive (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[8] Sriram V., “The Copyright Conundrum in Carnatic Music”, The Hindu, Jan. 30, 2025, available at: The Hindu (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[9]“Affordances and Experiential Dimensions of Digital …”, Music Perception, Vol. 42, No. 3, University of California Press, available at: UC Press Journals (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[10]“Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Music Copyright: Emerging Challenges in the Digital Era”, ScienceDirect, available at: ScienceDirect (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[11]“Artificial Intelligence Generated Content and Copyright Challenges in the Digital Era”, International Journal of Computational Science (2025), available at: SciOpen (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[12]“Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property Rights”, JETIR – Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, available at: JETIR PDF (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[13] Aaron J. Paige, Subaltern Sounds: Fashioning Folk Music in Tamil Nadu (M.A. Thesis, Wesleyan University, 2009), available at: Academia.edu (last visited on May 25, 2026). (wesleyan.academia.edu)

^[14] World Intellectual Property Organization, WIPO Magazine Issue 1/2025 (2025), available at: WIPO Magazine PDF (last visited on May 25, 2026).

^[15]“Sounding the Impact: A Case Study on the Social and Cultural …”, SciSpace, available at: SciSpace PDF (last visited on May 25, 2026).

Note - The information contained in this blog is for general informational purposes only. We endeavour to keep all content accurate, updated, and free from any form of misinformation or objectionable material. However, we shall not be responsible for any claims arising out of copyright infringement, plagiarism, or related issues; such responsibility lies solely with the respective authors. If you find any misinformation or objectionable content on this website, please report it to us at: editors.ilw@gmail.com