In a significant judgment that has stirred the legal and entertainment sectors, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has clarified the boundaries of copyright law as it pertains to an individual’s life story. This ruling came to light in the case of T-Series vs. Dreamline Reality Movies, which revolved around the contentious issue of copyright infringement claims over personal life events and narratives.
The court’s decision underscores a fundamental principle: “a person cannot claim copyright infringement for facts and events from their own life unless they have already created or developed a work that depicts their life story“. This means that for someone to establish a copyright violation over a life story, they must have already completed a work—be it a book or another literary production—and the work being copied must be based on that already completed work.
Judge Rajbir Sehrawat articulated that no infringement allegation could be made because copyright or replicating the work cannot be discussed until it is present. The bench further elaborated that the mere existence of specific facts indicating human behavior or a series of events indicating human behavior cannot be converted into a subject matter over which someone can bring a copyright claim.
The court also clarified that an idea, fact, or collection of facts alone, devoid of human skill, intelligence, or effort to transform them into a work, cannot be referred to as a “work” for the purposes of the Copyright Act.
ALSO READ| “Policemen Roaming Freely” | Bombay HC Criticizes Probe Team in ‘Fake’ Encounter Case
The case in question involved T-Series in relation to the movie ‘Dear Jassi’, inspired by the murder of Indo-Canadian woman Jaswinder Kaur, alias Jassi Sidhu, in 2000. A civil court had previously ordered T-Series to halt filming and distribution of the picture until Dreamline Reality Movies, a Punjab-based company, received a final ruling in their lawsuit.
Dreamline claimed that it had acquired the film rights from Sukhwinder Singh @ Mithu, Jassi Sidhu’s husband. However, T-Series contended that the film was produced after acquiring the film’s production rights based on a book authored by investigative journalist Fabian Dawson.
The High Court ruled that although Singh may be entitled to certain protections under other laws and for different purposes, his life story cannot be the subject of copyright. The court noted that Singh hasn’t written any books, articles, or other works based on his life narrative, thus lacking the authority to grant Dreamline Reality Movies any copyright.
Justice Sehrawat stated while acknowledging that T-Series had acquired the appropriate rights to make the film based on an existing book that incorporates the story of Jassi Sidhu and, incidentally, the life story of Singh;
“As such, the appellants have a legal right to make a film on the said book,”
The court also addressed Singh’s right to privacy, stating that the right to privacy is not an unalienable right, as clarified by the Supreme Court. It further reasoned that since the picture will generate revenue, Dreamline Reality Movies would not irrevocably lose out if the film’s distribution is unrestricted, leading to the overturning of the district court’s interim order.
ALSO READ| Money Laundering Case|| Jet Airways Founder Naresh Goyal Denied Bail, Granted Hospital Treatment
This ruling sets a precedent in understanding the interplay between personal life stories and copyright laws, highlighting the necessity of a tangible work for copyright claims and the limitations of personal experiences as intellectual property.
Adv. Khanak Sharma provides a comprehensive overview of the case and its implications, shedding light on the evolving landscape of copyright law in relation to individual life stories.
FOLLOW US ON TWITTER FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES