Music Licensing in Thailand: What Every Business Owner Needs to Know

You've opened your café. The furniture's good, the menu is dialled in, and the flat white is excellent. You connect your phone to the speakers, hit play on a personal Spotify account, and the room sounds the way you want it to.

Then someone walks in who isn't there for coffee. They listen for thirty seconds, take a quiet photo of the speaker, and ask whether the venue holds a public-performance licence.

This happens across Thailand every week. Owners assume that the streaming subscription they pay for personally also covers what plays in the shop. It doesn't — and the gap between what you assume and what the Copyright Act actually says is bigger than most people realise.

This is a long, sourced guide to what the law says, what the penalties really are, who collects in Thailand, and what your legal options look like. No alarmism, no scare tactics — just the statute, the practice, and the maths.

The statute that controls this

Thailand's primary copyright legislation is the Copyright Act B.E. 2537 (1994), amended five times since — most recently through B.E. 2565 (2022). The two amendments that matter most for venues are 2015, which expanded online enforcement, and 2022, which tightened protections and adjusted penalties.

Official sources:

• Copyright Act, English text — Department of Intellectual Property
• WIPO Lex — Copyright Act B.E. 2537, as amended
• Background context: Bangkok Post — "Law ramps up copyright fines"

If you want to read the law yourself, those are the right links to start from. Everything below is a plain-English walk through the parts that decide whether a business is compliant.

What "playing music in your café" actually means under the law

The chain of sections you need to understand runs Section 4 → Section 15 → Sections 27–29 → Section 69. Each builds on the one before it. If you read just one part of this guide, read this part.

Section 4 — the definition of "communication to the public"

"Communication to the public" means making a work available to the public by means of performing, lecturing, preaching, playing of music, causing perception by sound or image, constructing, distributing, or by any other means.

Source: Thailand Law Library — Sections 27–31

The Act names "playing of music" explicitly inside the definition. A café, a restaurant, a hotel lobby, a gym, a clinic, a salon, a retail store — anywhere recorded music is audible to customers — is making a public communication of that work.

Venue size doesn't change the analysis. Neither does whether music is the main attraction or just background. The test is whether the public can hear it.

Section 15 — the exclusive rights of the copyright owner

The copyright owner has the exclusive right to: (1) reproduction or adaptation; (2) communication to the public; (3) letting of the original or copies of a computer program, audiovisual work, cinematographic work, and sound recording…

The right to communicate a work to the public belongs to the rights-holder. A venue that plays the work has either obtained that right (via a licence) or has not. There is no middle ground.

Section 27 — infringement of musical works (composition + lyrics)

Any of the following acts against a copyright work … without authorisation … is deemed an infringement of copyright: (1) reproduction or adaptation; (2) communication to the public.

A song has two distinct copyrights stacked on top of each other:

1. The musical work — the underlying composition and lyrics. Owned by composers, lyricists, and music publishers. In Thailand, Music Copyright Thailand (MCT) administers public-performance rights on this layer.
2. The sound recording — the specific recorded performance you actually hear. Owned by record labels and producers.

Section 27 covers the first layer. Playing a song without permission from the composer/lyricist (or their CMO) is an infringement of the musical-work copyright.

Section 28 — infringement of sound recordings (the master)

Any of the following acts against a sound recording … without authorisation … is deemed an infringement of copyright: (1) reproduction or adaptation; (2) communication to the public; (3) commercial rental.

This is the second layer. Phonorights is the main Thai collecting society administering sound-recording rights for venue playback.

The practical implication: a single song played in your café can simultaneously infringe two separate copyrights — the musical work (Section 27) and the sound recording (Section 28). Two rights-holder groups can each request a licence on the same play.

Section 29 — broadcasts, with the explicit commercial language

Any of the following acts against a sound and video broadcasting … is deemed an infringement of copyright: … making a sound and video broadcasting work to be heard or seen in public by charging money or other commercial benefits.

Section 29 is where the commercial-purpose language becomes explicit. A venue plays music to attract customers, hold them longer, and set the mood that supports paid hospitality. That is the "other commercial benefit" the section refers to.

So far the picture is straightforward: any audible playback in your business reaches Section 4. Section 15 says only the rights-holder can authorise it. Sections 27–29 spell out what infringement looks like across each rights layer. Section 69 (further down) is the penalties.

Why your personal Spotify account doesn't cover the venue

This is the single most common misconception we hear from venue owners: "I pay for Spotify Premium, so I'm covered."

Spotify's Terms of Use limit the service to personal, non-commercial entertainment use. Apple Music's terms say the same thing. YouTube's terms prohibit commercial public performance of content accessed through the platform. None of these consumer products are licensed for venue playback in Thailand — by the platform's own contract with the user.

There is a B2B product Spotify operates called Soundtrack Your Brand, which holds the licences needed for commercial venue use in the United States and Canada. Soundtrack does not currently hold proper public-performance licensing in Thailand, and acknowledges this directly on its Thailand licensing page.

So the practical position for any Thai venue is:

• Personal Spotify / Apple Music / YouTube Music in the venue: contradicts the platform's terms and the Copyright Act.
• Spotify's commercial product (Soundtrack Your Brand): not licensed for Thailand.

Neither path is a workable answer for a Thai business.

The narrow exception that doesn't apply (Section 36)

The Copyright Act does carve out one exception for non-commercial public performances. Section 36 reads:

A public performance of a dramatic work or musical work that is not organised or conducted for seeking profit, without direct or indirect charge, and where performers do not receive remuneration shall not be deemed an infringement of copyright, provided it is conducted by an association, foundation or another organisation having objectives for public charity, education, religion or social welfare.

That language is tightly drawn. Section 36 protects:

• A school choir at a school event.
• A temple playing music during a religious ceremony.
• A registered charity hosting a free fundraising performance where performers are unpaid.

It does not protect a café, a restaurant, a hotel, a gym, a clinic, a retail store, or any commercial venue. By definition, those operate to seek profit. By Section 29's own language, ambient music there is "a commercial benefit."

There is one Thai Supreme Court ruling from 2010 that found a restaurant might escape criminal liability if music played a strictly incidental role. The Act has been amended twice since then (2015 and 2022), the language has tightened, and collecting societies pursue civil settlements regardless of whether the criminal threshold is met. A defence built on the 2010 case is, in practice, a difficult one.

The penalties — Sections 69, 70, 75

Section 69 — primary infringement (Sections 27, 28, 29)

There are two tiers, depending on whether the infringement is committed for commercial purpose:

Type of offence	Fine (THB)	Imprisonment
Standard infringement	20,000 – 200,000	—
Committed for commercial purpose	100,000 – 800,000	6 months – 4 years (or both fine + imprisonment)

Source: Thailand Law Library — Penalties (Sections 69–78)

A venue playing music for paying customers falls squarely in the commercial-purpose tier. The maximum statutory exposure is 800,000 THB plus four years' imprisonment.

Section 70 — secondary infringement (Section 31)

This applies to people who knowingly distribute or sell infringing copies — relevant to vendors and resellers more than venues, but worth knowing about:

Type of offence	Fine (THB)	Imprisonment
Standard	10,000 – 100,000	—
Commercial	50,000 – 400,000	3 months – 2 years (or both)

Section 75 — forfeiture

Infringing articles still in the offender's possession transfer to the copyright owner, and any equipment used to commit the offence (sound system, computer, the device piping audio into your speakers) can be confiscated. Most cases settle long before this stage, but the statute does authorise it.

The collecting societies — who actually licenses what

Thailand's licensing landscape involves several collecting societies, each representing different rights-holders. Understanding the map matters because a single annual licence from one society does not necessarily cover the others.

MCT (Music Copyright Thailand)

Administers public-performance rights for musical works — the composition and lyric layer. Represents Thai composers and lyricists, plus international repertoire under reciprocal agreements with foreign CMOs.

Phonorights

Administers rights for sound recordings — the master recordings owned by labels and producers. The counterpart to MCT on the recording side.

MPC (Music Performance Copyright)

Administers performance rights for specific catalogues, particularly international repertoire. MPC publishes a public tariff schedule that's worth knowing — see below.

GMM MPI

A subsidiary of GMM Grammy that administers rights for the GMM catalogue, which is the largest Thai music catalogue. Most popular Thai pop, ลูกทุ่ง, and a meaningful chunk of international repertoire distributed locally falls under GMM.

IFPI Thailand

The Thai branch of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, representing the major international labels (Universal, Sony, Warner) for sound-recording rights.

TECA (Thai Entertainment Content Trade Association)

Trade association protecting intellectual property across music, film, and broadcast on behalf of its members.

The practical takeaway: depending on what music plays in your venue, more than one of these organisations may have a legitimate claim. A licence from MCT alone does not authorise a sound recording owned by an IFPI member; a licence from Phonorights alone does not authorise a musical work administered by GMM MPI. A bundled commercial music service handles all of these layers in a single contract — which is a large part of why most venues choose that route.

What enforcement looks like in practice

Thailand's collecting societies field inspectors — often called "นักบิน" (literally "pilots," the colloquial term for field officers) — who visit venues to verify licensing. The inspection-and-settlement process tends to follow a recognisable pattern:

1. Visit and observation. A field officer enters the venue as a customer would, listens to what's playing, and documents it (photographs, audio capture, timestamps).
2. Business registration check. The officer pulls the venue's commercial registration, which establishes how long the business has been operating.
3. Back-fee calculation. The applicable annual tariff is multiplied by the years operating without a licence. For a 60-seat café operating three years unlicensed against MPC's published P02 tariff (23,000 THB/yr for the 21–60 seat band): 3 × 23,000 = 69,000 THB in back-fees alone.
4. Settlement offer. The CMO offers a settlement — typically the back-fees plus a forward licence — in exchange for not pursuing the matter under Section 69. Most venues settle at this stage to avoid criminal proceedings.
5. Forward compliance. From settlement onwards, the venue is on the books and renews the standard annual tariff.

This is normal CMO practice in many countries — Thailand isn't unusual in how it operates. The reason it lands harder here is that many venue owners don't realise the system exists until they're inside step one.

Real numbers — MPC's published tariffs

These are MPC's standard published rates, taken directly from the MPC website. They illustrate the order of magnitude — your actual exposure depends on which CMOs your music falls under, and a venue often needs licences across more than one body.

Cafés and restaurants — P02 (alcohol-serving, which covers most Thai cafés and restaurants):

Size	Annual fee (THB)
1 – 20 seats	18,000
21 – 60 seats	23,000
61 – 100 seats	30,000
101 – 200 seats	45,000
201+ seats	85,000

Hotels — H-series (blanket licence):

Tier	Annual fee (THB)
4-star+ / 50+ rooms (lobby, corridors, pool, gym)	25,000+
4-star+ / 100+ rooms (full coverage)	50,000+
Per bedroom (à la carte)	300/room

Fitness centres and spas — P10:

Size	Annual fee (THB)
≤ 500 sqm	15,000
501 – 1,000 sqm	25,000
1,001+ sqm	40,000

Sources: MPC Music — royalty fees · MPC Music — hotel tariffs

The maths of doing it wrong

A small case study with the same 60-seat café — operating three years unlicensed, then receiving a settlement notice:

Component	THB
Back-fees (3 yrs × 23,000)	69,000
Forward licence (year 4)	23,000
Settlement demand	92,000
If litigated under Section 69 (statutory ceiling)	up to 800,000 + 4 yrs imprisonment
One year of finetunes Standalone (399 THB/mo × 12)	4,788

The settlement on a typical mid-sized café is roughly 19 years' worth of finetunes Standalone in a single demand letter — and that's just one CMO. The statutory ceiling under Section 69 is more than 165 times the cost of a year's compliance.

The asymmetry is the point. Compliance is cheap. Non-compliance is not.

Your legal options

Three paths are genuinely legal. Pick the one that matches how you operate.

1. Direct licensing from the collecting societies

Contact MCT, Phonorights, and any other CMO whose repertoire your venue plays. Pay the published annual tariff to each.

Suits you if: You have specific catalogue requirements, you want to handle compliance in-house, and you're comfortable managing licence renewals and CMO correspondence.

Trade-offs: You may need licences from multiple societies. Renewals every year. You still need your own playback system and curated playlists. The licence covers the legal right, not the music itself.

2. Royalty-free or production-music libraries

Subscribe to a library that licences tracks for commercial use under a single agreement.

Suits you if: Your branding doesn't depend on recognisable popular music, and budget is the dominant constraint.

Trade-offs: Catalogue is narrower. Tracks can sound generic. Customers may notice the difference between recognisable repertoire and library music.

3. Licensed B2B streaming for businesses

A purpose-built service that handles the licensing on your behalf and curates the music for venue use. finetunes is one option; there are others, mainly US-based, with varying coverage of Thailand.

Suits you if: You want one subscription that resolves the legal layer and the music-supply layer at the same time, designed for the way venues actually use music throughout the day.

Trade-offs: Catalogue is the service's catalogue, not "any song you can think of."

For most cafés, restaurants, hotels, and gyms, option 3 is the cleanest path — partly because of bundled licensing, partly because daypart scheduling, playlists tuned to business type, and a curated rotation are useful in their own right.

See pricing for the actual numbers.

FAQ

"My venue plays the radio. Do I still need a licence?" Yes. The radio station holds a broadcast licence — that licence covers the station's broadcast, not your venue's onward communication of that broadcast to your customers. Section 4 covers any audible playback to the public, regardless of source.

"What about TV in the background?" Same answer. The TV broadcaster pays for its broadcast rights; the venue plays the broadcast to customers, which is a separate communication to the public.

"If music plays softly and customers can barely hear it, am I covered?" The Act has no volume threshold. If the public can hear it at all, it counts.

"I don't charge a cover. Does that change anything?" No. Section 29's "commercial benefit" is broader than admission charges — it covers atmosphere, dwell time, and customer experience that supports a paid hospitality business.

"What about playing TikTok, Instagram, or other social-platform audio in the venue?" Same status as Spotify or YouTube — those platforms' terms cover personal use only. Commercial venue playback isn't licensed by them.

"My café is a non-profit social enterprise. Does Section 36 apply?" Section 36 is drawn very tightly. It protects performances by associations, foundations, or organisations whose objectives are charity, education, religion, or social welfare — and only where there's no charge and performers aren't paid. A revenue-generating café — even a mission-driven one — typically doesn't fit. Talk to a lawyer if you're unsure where you sit.

"What if I just play music I bought on iTunes or from a CD?" Buying a copy gives you the right to listen privately. It doesn't transfer the public-performance right. Sections 27 and 28 still apply.

Closing

Music does real work in a venue. It changes how customers feel, how long they stay, and whether they come back — there's a reason hospitality groups invest in it. As we covered in our guide on how the right music transforms your café, the impact is measurable. The licensing question is just the cost of doing that work properly under Thai law.

The Copyright Act sets out a clear path: communicate music to the public, you need authorisation. The penalties exist to make non-compliance expensive enough that compliance becomes the rational choice. The CMOs collect because the rights-holders they represent are entitled to be paid. None of this is unusual — it is how performance licensing works in most countries with active enforcement.

What's specific to Thailand is the active inspection layer, the multi-CMO landscape, and the fact that a single demand letter can be a multi-year cost. Knowing that landscape ahead of time is the best way to keep your venue out of it.