The fight over the copyrights Bill used to be between film producers and music companies. Now, a new tension is brewing on the proposed law between the companies and television broadcasters.

The reason for the new strife is that in the Copyrights (Amendment) Bill, 2010, the HRD ministry has narrowed the definition of broadcasters by including radio and leaving out television. If the Bill is passed by Parliament, television broadcasters will not only require prior permission from music companies to broadcast the clips but will also have to pay a hefty sum (a minimum of R1-1.5 lakh for every 90 second) to the music firms.

However, radio broadcasters will not only have automatic access to such clips but will also pay a much lower royalty under the provisions of statutory licensing in public interest. When the Bill was introduced in the Rajya Sabha in 2010, statutory licensing was applicable to both radio and TV.

If passed in present form, music companies like T-Series, Venus and Yash Raj Films would get a free hand to charge hefty royalty from TV broadcasters for music clips and songs beamed on their channels.

Explaining the effect of the proposed amendment, a senior executive of a TV broadcasting house said: ?Recently, veteran actor Shammi Kapoor passed away. We aired shows in which his songs were played. It was of news value and in public interest. Post amendment, if we do such a thing, music firms will slap us with a hefty bill running into several lakhs. However, if the radio stations did the same, no such charge can be levied on them. This is absurd.?

Both the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) and the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) have opposed the amendment which substitutes the word ?broadcasters? with ?radio broadcasters?.

?With several music-based shows aired across hundred of channels, the move will increase the financial burden on broadcasters manifold,? a senior IBF executive told FE. Last year too the IBF expressed its reservations on the matter before the parliamentary standing committee examining the Copyright Bill. ?The amendment goes against the recommendations of the standing committee and against the sentiments of the broadcasters,? he added.

On its part, NBA expressed ?regret? and ?apprehension? on the changes introduced by the HRD ministry in Bill. ?…The changes will inure to the benefit only of vested business interests and act to the serious detriment of the fast growing broadcasting industry. These changes are also an attempt by the HRD ministry to overreach the Parliamentary Standing Committee, which had implicitly accepted the earlier dispensation. The NBA hopes the ministry will restore the earlier provision covering all broadcasting media,? it said in a statement.

?Music companies like T-Series control a lion’s share of the music released by films and singers. These changes are bound to help such music firms as they will get a free hand in fixing whatever royalty they want for airing a song on television,? a senior broadcaster said.

The Bill, which will replace the Copyright Act of 1957, has been introduced in the Rajya Sabha and was supposed to be debated and passed on Tuesday, but that could not happen as the Upper House was adjourned.

According to one broadcaster, there was no ambiguity on the relevant clause till recently. ?People with vested interests who want to create obstacles have played mischief by trying to create confusion by restricting the provision only for ‘radio broadcasting’.

If it becomes a law, all provision of Section 31D will be applicable to radio broadcasters denying musical content to TV, mobile phone, iPads or IPTV,? said another broadcaster. ?We will be meeting the MPs to draw their attention on this crucial amendment,? he added.