Westminster has moved to update cross‑border IP rules with India. A new Order in Council-the Copyright and Performances (Application to Other Countries) (Amendment) Order 2026-was made on 3 February and laid before Parliament on 10 February. It will commence on the day the UK‑India Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) enters into force, according to Legislation.gov.uk.

The trade deal itself is not yet in force. The Foreign Office presented the treaty to Parliament on 21 January 2026, and the House of Lords International Agreements Committee notes the CRAG scrutiny period ends on 5 March 2026. Entry into force follows an exchange of notifications, with several official papers indicating a 60‑day lag thereafter. For media firms, that timetable is the earliest realistic “switch‑on” for the Order. (gov.uk)

Legally, the Order adds India to the 2016 framework for broadcasts, meaning Indian broadcasts and wireless broadcasts attract UK copyright protection under Part 1 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. It also designates India for reciprocal protection under Part 2 (performers’ rights) but with a key caveat: section 182D does not apply to India.

Section 182D is the UK rule that gives performers an unassignable right to equitable remuneration when a commercially published sound recording is played in public or communicated to the public (for example, on radio). In practice, UK broadcasters and venues pay blanket licences and collecting societies such as PPL distribute the performer share under this rule. (wipolex-res.wipo.int)

Why exclude s182D? India acceded to the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty in 2018 with a declaration that it would not apply Article 15(1), the provision that underpins performers’ single equitable remuneration for broadcasting and communication to the public. The UK carve‑out mirrors that position: Indian performers won’t benefit from the UK’s statutory s182D right, even though other performers’ rights will apply. (wipo.int)

For broadcasters and audio services operating in the UK, the near‑term impact is about distribution rather than the size of the bill. Licence fees for using sound recordings are still due; what changes-once the Order starts-is the statutory entitlement of Indian performers to a share of those receipts. Expect collecting societies to set out how repertoire will be categorised and how any non‑qualifying recordings are handled in distributions.

For labels and distributors, the exclusion pushes more weight onto contracts. Without s182D applying to Indian performers in the UK, remuneration will depend on the recording agreement rather than a guaranteed statutory share. Featured and non‑featured talent should ensure their contracts clearly set out how UK broadcast/public‑performance revenue is calculated and paid.

On the India side, the Order proceeds only after ministers were satisfied the law there gives adequate protection to British performances and to UK broadcast‑related copyrights. That will matter for UK producers and broadcasters seeking to enforce rights in India under CETA once it begins, although statutory performer remuneration for broadcasting is not part of India’s regime, consistent with its WPPT reservation. (wipo.int)

Digital nuances are worth flagging. Section 182D covers public performance and communication to the public, but not on‑demand “making available” uses. In plain terms, linear radio and non‑interactive streams are in scope of s182D; on‑demand streaming is not. The carve‑out therefore primarily bites on radio‑style uses of Indian recordings in the UK rather than subscription streaming royalties. (wipolex-res.wipo.int)

For TV platforms and channel aggregators, the extension of UK copyright protection to Indian broadcasts tightens the legal basis for licensing Indian channels and live feeds into the UK. Most established services already license those rights; the change provides clearer statutory backing as cross‑border carriage expands.

Policy‑wise, the move sits alongside the government’s recent material‑reciprocity debates on foreign performers’ rights. Ministers have argued for tailoring protection where other countries don’t offer equivalent benefits to UK artists-a stance that drew scrutiny in the Lords last year. The India carve‑out is consistent with that approach. (hansard.parliament.uk)

What to do now: treat 5 March as the near‑term milestone for UK parliamentary scrutiny, then watch for ratification on both sides. If notifications are exchanged soon after, implementation could follow roughly two months later. Finance and legal teams should pre‑tag Indian repertoire in cue sheets, confirm anticipated distribution treatment with CMOs, and refresh artist contracts ahead of go‑live. (publications.parliament.uk)