Introduction:
The suit was filed by the plaintiff seeking a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant through its dealers, distributors, employees and/or assigns from making and selling, any work indulged in the novelization of the cinematograph film NAYAK. As per the plaintiff, novelization of the screenplay NAYAK without the consent of plaintiff amounts to infringement of copyright of the plaintiff and therefore the defendant should be barred from publishing the novel.
Facts of the case:
In the case[1], R.D. Bansal, Karta of the HUF, producer of film “Nayak” commissioned Satyajit Ray with the task to write as well as direct the Screenplay “Nayak”. The film was released in the year 1966 and later in 1992 Bharat Ratna Satyajit Ray passed away. In the year 2018 Mr. Bhaskar Chattopadhyay wrote a novel of the screenplay “Nayak” and was published by Harpercollins Publishers India Private Limited, the Defendant.
The Plaintiff:
The plaintiff claims to be the owner of copyright in the screenplay of “Nayak” and contests that the publication of novel by the defendant constituted infringement of the plaintiff‘s copyright, within the meaning of Section 51[2] of the Copyright Act 1957. The plaint stated that there is a difference between “script” and “screenplay”, as script is only the narrative of the story whearas the screenplay is the narrations of every individual scenes, dialogue, actions, movements. And these are only written at the instance of the producer as he allocates the budget for the film and intends to risk of all commercial benefit or failure. The plaintiff also relied on clause b of the proviso to section 17[3] of the act which states that where “cinematograph film made, for valuable consideration at the instance of any person, such person, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, shall, be the first owner of the copyright therein.” It was further emphasized that RDB was completely in charge of the movie’s commercial distribution and commercial exploitation, having committed all of the funds into its production, he would be responsible for the movie’s potential commercial failure, thus having the copyright of the screenplay of the film.
The Defendant:
The defendant, per contra, contests the plaintiff’s assertion of copyright in the “Nayak” screenplay and states that as admitted by plaintiff, the writer and director of the film is Mr. Satyajit Ray, therefore, ipso facto, Mr. Ray is the owner of copyright of the script and screenplay of the film. Relying on section 14(1)(a)[4], the defendant claimed that Satyajit Ray only consented to write the script and screenplay, and this consent didn’t amount to transfer the copyright held by him in favour of the plaintiff. Therefore, upon his passing in 1992, copyright in the script passes to his son Sandip Ray and the Society for Preservation of Satyajit Ray Archives (hereinafter, “SPSRA”). The defendant asserts that Sandip Ray and SPSRA granted him permission to novelize the film’s screenplay and therefore prayed for summary rejection of prayer in the plaint. In the written declaration, the defendant claims that it has not appropriated any material from the movie for which the plaintiff owns the copyright. The sole literary works used by the defendant in the contested novel are the film’s screenplay and certain still images from the movie, both of which bear Satyajit Ray’s copyright. Therefore, there is no infringement of the plaintiff’s copyright.
Issue:
Whether, in a case in which the author of the screenplay of the film does so under a contract with the producer, against remuneration, copyright in the screenplay would vest in the author or in the producer?
Judgement:
The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi relied on various sections of the Copyright Act and was of the view that the Author is defined as, in relation to a literary work, as the author of the work. “The author of the screenplay of the film “Nayak” is, therefore, indisputably, Satyajit Ray. As the first owner of the copyright in the screenplay of the film Nayak, therefore, the right to novelize the screenplay also vested in Satyajit Ray. That right could be assigned by him – and, consequent on his demise, by his son and others on whom the right devolved or on any other person, under Section 18(1)[5] of the Copyright Act. The conferment of the right to novelize the screenplay, by Sandip Ray and the SPSRA on the defendant, therefore, is wholly in order.” The plaintiff has no right whatsoever, in law, to injunct the defendant from novelizing the screenplay of the film “Nayak”.
[1] RDB and Co. HUF vs Harpercollins Publishers India Private Limited, 2023:DHC:3551, 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 435
[2] The Copyright Act, 1957, § 51, No. 14, Acts of Parliament, 1957
[3] Id. §17
[4] Id. §14(1)(a)
[5] Id. § 18(1)
DUCTUS EDGE 