For decades, Warner/Chappell collected royalties every time “Happy Birthday” was sung commercially — until a US court found it never actually owned the lyrics, and freed the world’s most popular song to the public domain. A cautionary tale about registering copyright with care.
Who owns a song?
Under Section 17 of the Indian Copyright Act, the author — the composer and lyricist for a song — is the first owner, and no one may exploit the song without authorisation. Publishing companies take on protection and enforcement by having the authors’ rights assigned to them, handling promotion, licensing and royalties.
A crucial point: owning copyright doesn’t lift the burden of proof in a suit contesting ownership. A simple piece of counter-evidence from a challenger can shift the burden back to the claimed owner.
The Warner/Chappell saga
The US “Happy Birthday” dispute makes the point vividly. In 2013, artists and filmmakers billed for using the song filed a class action against Warner/Chappell, disputing its copyright.
The history: Patty and Mildred Hill composed “Good Morning to All” in the 1890s; its tune became “Happy Birthday.” The Hills sold their interest to Clayton F. Summy Co., which filed and published the song in 1935. The rights passed to Birch Tree Group, then to Warner/Chappell in 1988 — which claimed exclusive copyright, collected royalties for years, and expected to until 2030.
The ruling
After three years of hearings, Judge George King (late 2015) found that while the tune had long been in the public domain, the lyrics weren’t published until 1911, and Summy Co. never actually acquired the lyrics — so it never held copyright in them. Warner/Chappell’s claim over the whole song collapsed.
The company settled for US$14 million to those who’d paid licence fees, and “Happy Birthday” entered the public domain after 80 years — no more royalties. The case drew global attention, partly because most people never knew the ubiquitous song was under corporate copyright at all.
The lesson
For every artist and author: register your copyright with care. A chain-of-title gap — like Summy Co. never acquiring the lyrics — can unravel even decades of assumed ownership, and you may bear the burden of proving it when challenged.
The takeaways
- Ownership can be challenged — holding copyright doesn’t remove your burden of proof.
- Chain of title matters — a gap in assignments can void an assumed ownership.
- Register and document carefully — vague or incomplete records invite disputes.
- Even ubiquitous works can be (wrongly) claimed — until someone tests the title.
Frequently asked questions
Is ‘Happy Birthday’ still under copyright? No — a US court ruled Warner/Chappell never owned the lyrics, and the song entered the public domain after the 2015–2016 case and $14M settlement.
Does owning copyright remove my burden of proof? No — in an ownership dispute, a challenger’s counter-evidence can shift the burden back to you, so careful registration and documentation matter.
Who is the first owner of copyright in a song? Under Section 17, the author — the composer and lyricist — unless the rights are assigned, commonly to a publisher.
What’s the lesson from the Warner/Chappell case? Register and document copyright (and chain of title) carefully — a gap can unravel even long-assumed ownership.
Useful official resources
- The Copyright Act, 1957
- Copyright Office, India