Delhi HC directs A R Rahman, Ponniyin Selvan 2 makers to deposit Rs 2 cr in copyright case
Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, the son of Faiyazuddin Dagar and nephew of Zahiruddin Dagar, contended in the lawsuit that he held the copyright in all original compositions of Junior Dagar Brothers, including 'Shiv Stuti', which the defendants had unlawfully infringed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
14-05-2025
- Mint
A.R. Rahman case revives a frequent clash. But the remedy is hard to find
The copyright dispute between celebrated composer A. R. Rahman and the Junior Dagar brothers has brought into the spotlight a frequent clash between Indian classical music and mainstream film compositions. It's a subject mired in grey areas, where it's tough to separate inspiration from outright infringement. Preventive measures involve conducting music rights due diligence, seeking express permissions from custodians of traditional works, and crediting original authors, according to experts. But traditional musicians encounter obstacles such as the absence of formal copyright registration, oral transmission of works, and limited access to legal remedy, often making it more difficult to establish infringement. 'The legal terrain surrounding infringement of classical music by mainstream composers is fraught with questions of originality, authorship, moral rights, and derivative status," said Gaurav Sahay, founder partner, Arthashastra Legal. 'The intersection of traditional knowledge and commercial music requires nuanced judicial consideration." The Delhi High Court directed Rahman and the makers of Tamil period drama Ponniyin Selvan: Part Two to deposit ₹2 crore in connection with a copyright lawsuit by the Junior Dagar brothers' classical rendition of Shiv Stuti. The Dagar brothers argue that the song is a copy of their rendition of the Shiv Stuti in the Dhurpad genre. Also read |Film broadcast rights drop 10% in 2024 amid shift to streaming, piracy issues The Rahman case is not an isolated incident but part of a broader legal and cultural tension between the domains of classical compositions and popular music production, said Sahay. The core legal challenges involve originality versus a derivative work, which requires examination of sufficient creativity, arrangement, and distinct changes in the adaptation to merit protection. Classical compositions, especially those orally transmitted, often lack formal notations or copyright registrations, making documentation difficult. This makes it hard for the original creators or their heirs to prove ownership or authorship in legal proceedings. Similarly, issues involving moral rights and attribution, wherein, even if a work has entered the public domain, the moral right of attribution can still be invoked by the creator or their heirs on grounds of distortion or use without acknowledgement. Plagiarism Mainstream composers such as Anu Malik, Pritam, and Bappi Lahiri have also been accused of plagiarism regarding the copying of western melodies or occasionally from Indian folk or classical origins, said Meghna Mishra, senior partner at Karanjawala & Co. The basis for complaints frequently relates to the unauthorized use of certain lyrics, compositions and beats that have been recorded or written down, even if they have their origins in traditional forms. 'While the AR Rahman case has brought this issue to the forefront recently, there have been instances where mainstream composers have faced legal scrutiny regarding copyright infringement from classical music," said Anupam Shukla, partner, Pioneer Legal. 'The core contention often revolves around the degree of originality versus derivation." In the film Kantara, the song Varaha Roopam was deemed to infringe on Kerala band Thaikkudam Bridge's Navarasam. 'The main contention in these cases is proving originality within traditional frameworks and distinguishing between protectable creative elements and unprotectable traditional elements," Shukla said. A subtle but significant line In the Indian copyright law, the line between drawing inspiration from a raga and committing infringement is subtle, but significant. While ragas themselves are part of the public domain, original compositions or arrangements based on them can still enjoy copyright protection, said Aishwarya Kaushiq, partner, disputes practice, BTG Advaya. This means that even if a composer bases a song on a traditional raga, the way it is structured, orchestrated, or expressed can be protected. The courts apply the 'substantial similarity" test to assess whether an allegedly infringing work has copied not just the idea but the expression of the original. This becomes challenging when inspiration blurs into replication, especially in the absence of clear credits or documentation. To be sure, small segments of a raga-based composition, like an identifiable melodic phrase or hook, may not always be considered copyright infringement. For example, a fleeting phrase incorporated casually into the background score of a movie might not raise issues of ownership. However, if that same segment forms the main hook, climax, or emotional peak of another work, the dynamics change drastically. 'Courts often rely on the lay listener test, wherein they assess whether an average listener perceives substantial similarity between the two works. However, certain cases might demand an expert evaluation, especially in instances where the borrowed segment's uniqueness lies in subtle nuances and microtones, intricate ornamentation, or the way it connects notes within a raga framework. This dual approach sometimes leads to conflicting judgments," said Abhishek Chansoria, principal associate at Saraf and Partners. Also read | YouTube is preferred launch pad for new originals despite streaming services Multiple instances of infringement disputes involving traditional or classical music have been settled. These settlements typically occur due to prominent composers' reputational sensitivity, the economic value of avoiding an injunction, and the general preference within the entertainment industry to resolve disputes quickly to avoid production delays and adverse publicity. 'To avoid the risk of copyright infringement claims, film producers and composers should take proactive legal and creative measures, such as Due Diligence, before releasing a song based on or inspired by classical compositions. Identifying title documentation, wherein producers ensure they obtain clear and written assignments or licenses for any traditional compositions, recordings, or lyrics being adapted," Sahay said. Derivative works require clearance, wherein the producer must identify the copyright holder and obtain appropriate clearances. Credit attribution, that is, even though no license is required, crediting the source or traditional inspiration can help mitigate claims. Also read | Malayalam cinema thrives at box office as other regional films falter
The Hindu
06-05-2025
- The Hindu
Delhi HC stays interim order against A.R. Rahman in song copyright case
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday (May 6, 2025) stayed an interim order against music composer A.R. Rahman and the makers of the film Ponniyin Selvan 2 over an alleged copyright infringement case related to the song 'Veera Raja Veera' featured in the 2023 film. A Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Ajay Digpaul, however, directed Mr. Rahman and the makers of the film to deposit within 10 days ₹2 crore with its registry, as directed by the Single Judge Bench April 25 order. The court posted Mr. Rahman's stay application and the appeal challenging the single judge's order on May 23. Also read | AR Rahman on Abhijeet Bhattacharya's criticism for 'overusing' technology: 'It's nice to blame me for everything' The Single Judge Bench's order came on a lawsuit by classical vocalist and Padma Shri awardee Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, who accused Mr. Rahman and the film's production houses - Madras Talkies and Lyca Productions - of unauthorised use of a classical composition titled 'Shiva Stuti', originally composed by the Junior Dagar Brothers, Late Ustad N. Faiyazuddin Dagar and Late Ustad Zahiruddin Dagar. Justice Prathiba M. Singh had held that the 'Veera Raja Veera' song is 'not merely based on or inspired from the suit composition - Shiva Stuti but is, in fact, identical to the suit composition with mere change in lyrics'. Additionally, Justice Singh had awarded ₹2 lakh as costs to Mr. Dagar, to be paid by Mr. Rahman and other defendants within four weeks. Created in 1970s According to Mr. Dagar, the 'Shiva Stuti' composition was created by his father and uncle, also known as the Junior Dagar Brothers, sometime in the 1970s. He claimed that following his father and uncle's demise in 1989 and 1994, respectively, the copyright passed to him through an oral family settlement among the legal heirs. Mr. Dagar had claimed that the composition was shared with Mr. Rahman without his knowledge or authorisation and was subsequently used in the film's soundtrack without appropriate credit.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
06-05-2025
- Business Standard
Delhi HC stays order against A R Rahman in 'Ponniyin Selvan 2' case
Rahman, Madras Talkies and Lyca Productions were, therefore, ordered to deposit Rs 2 crore with the court to be kept in a fixed deposit subject to the final outcome of the lawsuit Press Trust of India New Delhi The Delhi High Court on Tuesday stayed an interim order in a copyright case against music composer A R Rahman and the makers of the film "Ponniyin Selvan 2" over a musical composition. A bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul, however, directed Rahman and the makers of the film to deposit within 10 days Rs 2 crore with its registry, as directed by the single judge. On April 25, a high court single judge in the interim also ordered for inserting a slide in the film on all OTT and online platforms to give due credit to Junior Dagar Brothers -- Late Ustad N Faiyazuddin Dagar and Late Ustad Zahiruddin Dagar -- for the composition. The division bench stayed this direction too. Rahman's stay application and the appeal challenging the single judge's order was posted on May 23. The single judge awarded Rs 2 lakh costs to the family member of the late artists. In the interim order, the single judge ruled from a listener's point of view, the core of Rehman's song "Veera Raja Veera" in the film was "not just inspired but is, in fact, identical" in notes, emotion and aural impact to the "Shiva Stuti". It was in violation of the rights of the original composers of the musical tribute to Lord Shiva, his order added. Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, the son of Faiyazuddin Dagar and nephew of Zahiruddin Dagar, contended in the lawsuit that he held the copyright in all original compositions of Junior Dagar Brothers, including "Shiva Stuti", which the defendants had unlawfully infringed upon. "In the ultimate analysis, therefore, this court holds that the impugned song is not merely based on or inspired from the suit composition Shiva Stuti but is, in fact, identical to the suit composition with mere change in lyrics. The adding of other elements may have rendered the impugned song more like a modern composition but the basic underlying musical work is identical," the single judge held. Rahman, Madras Talkies and Lyca Productions were, therefore, ordered to deposit Rs 2 crore with the court to be kept in a fixed deposit subject to the final outcome of the lawsuit. The plaintiff was found to have a prima facie case for copyright infringement by the defendants and the court observed in the absence of an interim order "irreparable injury would be caused to the creative rights and moral rights of the original composers who are no longer alive". The balance of convenience was therefore held to be in favour of the plaintiff. Rahman's counsel argued "Shiva Stuti" was based on the traditional dhrupad genre which was in the public domain, and since the manner of singing and the composition itself was not original, it was not capable of copyright protection.
