1.1INTRODUCTION
As we know creative works and talent without unprecedented ease can transcend national borders as the entertainment industry operates globally because of rapid development of technologies and rise of globalized markets, where the content can be distributed with ease What facilitates this global exchange and enables rights holders to grant permissions for use of their IP across diverse jurisdictions, encompassing copyrights, trademarks, and patents are the cross-border entertainment contracts. The intricacies created by these agreements which covers a vast spectrum from music recording and film publishing and production, digital content licensing and talent management, distribution, co-production. and when due to disparate legal frameworks, cultural norms, and business practices across different jurisdictions, the complexity of these arrangements are significantly amplified due to extension beyond the national borders. 2
3Beside the legal intricacies embedded within these contracts and cross border conflicts, these agreements are essential for the creators to expand their works worldwide. In order to mitigate the challenges which could complicate the agreements are diversified IP protection laws, cultural differences, different norms and enforcement issues.
2.4SOME IMPORTANT CLAUSES IN CROSS-BORDER ENTERTAINMENT CONTRACTS
The importance of clauses within the contracts plays a major role in carrying legal implications and addressing specific aspects of the agreements which ultimately focuses on preserving the rights of the holder or the creators.
2.1 Scope of Work and Deliverables: Defining the Creative and Commercial Boundaries
These provisions are essential because they provide clarity to avoid misunderstandings by outlining the work, project specifics, deadlines, and deliverables. They frequently outline the planning, start, and finish dates of a feature film. Mutual expectations are aligned by this clarity.
A clear understanding of the agreed work is crucial because Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872,5 requires mutual consent and a lawful object, even though the Act lacks a specific "Scope of Work" section. The UNIDROIT Principles (UPICC)67 cover contract "performance" and "content," and precision ensures that both parties completely agree on the scope of the agreement and prevents ambiguity.
2.2 Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) & Licensing
This crucial provision establishes who owns and grants licenses for intellectual property (IP) (patents, trademarks, and copyright) developed or utilised during the contract. Particularly for cross-border exclusive or non-exclusive licenses, it should include details about duration, territory, and payment8. The Copyright Act, 1957 in India mandates written assignments outlining the scope, duration, and royalties (Section 19), defines economic rights (Section 14), and protects original works (Section 13). Civil (Section 55), criminal (Section 63), and moral rights protection (Section 57) remedies are available for violations. 9
With a strong focus on both economic and moral rights, the Berne Convention10 guarantees automatic protection, national treatment, and independent protection on a global scale.
2.3 Compensation And Payment
Payment timing and mode are set in the contract in this clause, which could comprise upfront fees, royalties, profit-sharing, or milestone payments. When payments are due at the beginning of a case, especially if the deal is done across countries with many fluctuating exchange rates, transfers, and taxes to consider, an irrefutable payment schedule is essential. The Indian Contract Act of 1872 11regulates payment and consideration in India. While Section 10 stipulates that a contract must have lawful consideration in order to be enforceable, Section 2(d) defines consideration as an act, abstinence, or promise made at the promisor's desire. 12The Act, which is based on English law principles, guarantees clarity and remedies for payment disputes. 13The UNIDROIT Principles govern payment terms and allow parties to decide the currency thereof. If the parties have not specified one or it is impossible to perform payment in the currency specified, the payment shall be made in the currency of the place of payment14. 15
2.4 Governing law and Jurisdiction
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 allows the party to choose the law governing their contracts making sure that it doesn't violate the public policy. The UNIDROIT 16and Hague Principles 17has significance on the autonomy of the Party, further letting parties to select which state regulations or law shall rule upon the contract. This clause ensures legal certainity and reducing conflicts as it specifically mentions the law and jurisdiction under which the Contract shall be enforced. 1819
2.5 Dispute Resolution Mechanism
20Section 7 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 defines the valid arbitration agreements. Further Section 8 empowers the court to handle the disputes related to Arbitration. Section 16 of the Act emphasiezes on the jurisdictional competency courts. Section 34 limits the grounds for setting aside the awards.21 ICC, LCIA22and UNCITRAL23 has significance on governing law and arbitrator selection offering consistency and reliability in international Dispute resolution. 24The Arbitral awards are enforceable in 172 states including India (Part II, Chapter I) which are signatory to the New York Convention (1958). 2526
2.6 Termination
2728Section 39 of The Indian Contract Act, 1872 allows either of the Party to terminate the Contract on failure to perform the obligations. In order to offer a protection and exit strategy from unfavorable situations, this clause specifically end the contract before its term provided by several types of terminations such as termination for force majeure, for cause, mutual agreement and automatic29. "30Soft law," 31which reflects the idea that perpetual contracts undermine party autonomy, permits the termination of indefinite contracts with reasonable notice on a global scale (Art. 6:109 PECL, Art. 5.1.8 UNIDROIT PICC).3233
3. 34LEGAL INTRICACIES IN CROSS-BORDER ENTERTAINMENT CONTRACTS
Cross-border entertainment contracts face significant legal and cultural obstacles in addition to core clauses.35
Enforcement of Foreign Judgements and Jurisdictional Difficulties:
Multiple legal systems are involved in cross-border transactions, which leads to complicated jurisdictional problems.3637 Since most nations do not automatically recognise or enforce judgements from others, enforcing foreign judgements is a major concern3839. Enforcement in India is governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 190840. Section 44A allows for the execution of judgements from "reciprocating territories." With the exception of judgements that lack jurisdiction, were obtained through fraud, are against the law or public policy, or violate constitutional rights, others must file a new lawsuit under Section 13. Enforcement may be blocked internationally (such as the UK)41 for non-final judgements, fraud, violations of public policy, natural justice violations, or lack of jurisdiction.42 Therefore, selecting a jurisdiction requires careful strategic planning and provides a forum but does not ensure enforcement.43
3.1 Communication Barriers and Cultural Differences:
Cross-border contracts are particularly vulnerable to cultural differences, which can affect performance, interpretation, and negotiation. Low-context cultures, like the US, value directness and run the risk of miscommunication, whereas high-context cultures, like Japan, rely on implicit cues.44 Different cultures have different ideas about time: polychromic cultures (like those in Latin America) place more emphasis on relationships, while monochromic cultures (like those in Germany) prioritise schedules45. Contract expectations, deadlines, and enforcement strategies are shaped by these variations. Delays, miscommunications, or violations may result from cultural norms that are not in line with one another regarding hierarchy, trust, or adaptability46. Therefore, in order to reduce risks and guarantee efficient contract performance outside of the legal text, cultural intelligence is crucial.4748
3.2 Tax implications
4950Complex tax issues that cross-border entertainment transactions must deal with include managing multi-jurisdictional income, transfer pricing between related entities, and foreign withholding taxes5152. Planning for foreign tax credits is crucial because income earned abroad may be subject to withholding taxes.5354Businesses also have to deal with different tax bases in different jurisdictions, which have different taxation policies for payroll, sales, and real estate.
By providing tax credits, exemptions, or lower rates, "Double Tax Avoidance Agreements" (DTAAs)55 help to prevent double taxation. They also promote trade and facilitate information sharing to counteract tax evasion56. It Intricate transfer pricing regulations, inconsistent royalty tax rates, double taxation, and disparate definitions of taxable income can all reduce profits if tax complexity is not properly planned for. This emphasises the necessity of local counsel and professional international tax structuring in order to maximise financial flows, lower risks, and guarantee compliance.
4.LANDMARK CASE LAWS
Here this landmark case law focuses on the choice of dispute resolution is just as important as the commercial terms in the global entertainment industry of today, where co-productions, licensing, and distribution agreements frequently span several nations. The ruling in Imax Corporation v. E-City Entertainment (India) Pvt. Ltd57. by the Supreme Court demonstrates how the arbitration's location can affect how cross-border disputes turn out. London will serve as the seat of the ICC arbitration that Imax and E-City agreed to. In accordance with Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996, E-City challenged the tribunal's three awards, which included more than 9.4 million dollars in damages and significant costs, before the Bombay High Court between 2006 and 2008. Imax successfully argued before the Supreme Court that Part I (including Section 34) did not apply because the parties had selected London as the competent court.
In Eros International Media Limited vs Telemax Links India Pvt Limited And 7 Ors on 12 April, 2016>58, EROS gave Telemax the sole right to distribute movie content under a Term Sheet, with a minimum non-refundable guarantee of ₹1.5 crores. The Long Form Agreement would take precedence over the Term Sheet. But the disagreement started before this was carried out. So, a comprehensive arbitration clause covering disputes arising from or related to the Term Sheet was included in the Term Sheet. When EROS filed a lawsuit alleging copyright infringement and seeking damages and injunctions, Telemax attempted to enforce this clause. The main query was whether or not these IP-related conflicts could be arbitrated. The Court ruled that because commercial IP disputes involving contracts, like licensing or distribution agreements, involve rights in personam (between the parties) as opposed to rights in rem (against the world), they are arbitrable. So the choice of law that has been decided by the parties regarding Arbitration shall be honoured.
5. CONCLUSION
Global monetisation of creative works is made possible by cross-border entertainment contracts, but they also require careful drafting, legal knowledge, and proactive risk management. Legal frameworks are still fragmented, requiring legal, financial, and cultural sophistication, despite the fact that technology connects audiences around the world. While payment terms involve intricate tax and regulatory issues, intellectual property remains crucial but is susceptible to digital infringement. Depecage aids in customising laws; arbitration guarantees privacy and enforceability in situations where court rulings might not be upheld. Confidentiality and termination provisions must strike a balance between data privacy, flexibility, and certainty. In order to ensure strong, worthwhile international collaborations, success necessitates careful planning, precise jurisdiction selection, sound dispute resolution, due diligence, risk reduction, and cultural sensitivity.
Footnotes
1 https://kindalawful.com/entertainment-law/cross-border-licensing.html
2 Greenfield, S., & Osborn, G. (1998). Contract and Control in the Entertainment Industry: Dancing on the Edge of Heaven (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315259376
4 https://lawbhoomi.com/commercial-agreements/
5 https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2187/2/A187209.pdf>
6 https://www.unidroit.org/contracts/
7 https://www.unidroit.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Unidroit-Principles-2016-English-bl.pdf
9 https://blog.ipleaders.in/an-overview-of-the-copyright-act-1957/
10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention
11 https://www.education.gov.in/sites/upload_files/mhrd/files/upload_document/CprAct.pdf
12 https://cleartax.in/s/dtaa-between-india-and-usa
13 https://vuniversity.in/the-indian-contract-act-1872/
14 https://tax2win.in/guide/double-tax-avoidance-agreement-dtaa
16 https://www.unidroit.org/contracts/
17 https://cisg-online.org/files/commentFiles/Marshall_66_AmJCompL_2018_175.pdf
18 https://aaronhall.com/governing-law-clauses-cross-border-marketplace-use/
19 vhttps://ledroitindia.in/cross-border-contract/
20 https://rollcallrecap.com/essential-elements-in-entertainment-contracts
21 https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/1978/3/a1996-26.pdf
23 https://uncitral.un.org/en/texts/arbitration/contractualtexts/arbitration
25http s://www.pillsburylaw.com/en/news-and-insights/circuit-split-ny-convention-enforceable-us.html
27ht tps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Contract_Act,_1872
28h ttps://www.defactolaw.in/post/understanding-breach-of-contract-in-india
29[ 29] https://thelegalschool.in/blog/contract-termination-clause
30 https://kindalawful.com/entertainment-law/common-clauses-in-entertainment-contracts.html
31 https://blogs.law.ox.ac.uk/oblb/blog-post/2025/02/term-contract-can-party-be-bound-forever
32 https://treelife.in/legal/termination-clauses-in-a-contract/
33 https://rollcallrecap.com/essential-elements-in-entertainment-contracts
34 https://www.trans-lex.org/400700/_/ohadac-principles-on-international-commercial-contracts/
35 https://thecampbelllawgroup.com/international-contracts-cross-border-considerations/
37 https://www.lawtrades.com/blog-posts/cross-border-legal-work-key-jurisdictional-issues
38 https://www.techlaw.az/article/crossborder-transactions-and-remedies-in-breach-of-them
39 https://astrealegal.com/publications/enforcement-of-foreign-judgments/
40 https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2191/5/190805.pdf
42 https://paulhumbertlaw.com/foreign-judgment-enforcement/
43 https://thecampbelllawgroup.com/international-contracts-cross-border-considerations/
44 https://kindalawful.com/entertainment-law/cross-border-licensing.html
46 https://thecampbelllawgroup.com/international-contracts-cross-border-considerations/
47 https://youaccel.com/lesson/cultural-considerations-in-international-contracts/premium
48 https://media.whu.edu.cn/uploadfiles/20240109dqrfo.pdf
49 https://thetaxadvisory.us/sports-and-entertainment-tax-issues/
50 https://thetaxadvisory.us/sports-and-entertainment-tax-issues/
55 https://tax2win.in/guide/double-tax-avoidance-agreement-dtaa
56 https://cleartax.in/s/dtaa-between-india-and-usa
57 IMAX Corpn. v. E-City Entertainment (India) (P) Ltd., (2017) 5 SCC 331(TP_2017_5_scc_331_344_2182045_klsacin_20250623_153738_1_14.pdf)
58 Eros International Media Limited vs Telemax Links India Pvt Limited And 7 Ors on 12 April, 2016
To view the original article click here
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
