[Broadcasting rights of Ranveer Singh film 83] Bombay High Court rules in favour of Netflix, Hotstar, Reliance

The Bombay High Court this week refused to restrain Star India (owner of OTT platform Hotstar) and Netflix from streaming the Bollywood film ’83’ on their respective broadcasting portals, while upholding the exploitation rights of Reliance Entertainment Studios [Mad Man Film Ventures Pvt Ltd v. Reliance Entertainment Studios Pvt Ltd & Ors]..The issue for consideration before the High Court was regarding the exploitation of satellite and/or digital media by Star and Netflix..The plaintiff, Mad Man Film Ventures, stated that in light of consent terms, the ownership of intellectual property of the Ranveer Singh-starrer was divided between itself (37.5%), Reliance Entertainment (37.5%) and Vibri Media, one of the producers of the film (25%).Senior Advocate Virag Tulzapurkar for Mad Man claimed that the exploitation rights of the film vested with the company for the period after the first cycle (which was the first 10 years after release of the film). He argued that as per the clauses in the contract, for that period, it was entitled to receive a percentage of the net collection from Reliance.Tulzapurkar added that until such payment was fully received, it had no obligation to consent to the delivery of the film for exploitation of digital or satellite rights. Due to the non-compliance of this clause by Reliance, Mad Man had not granted its consent to the platforms to broadcast the same and hence Star and Netflix were required to be restrained from exploiting their rights received through Reliance without Mad Man’s prior consent, said Tulzapurkar..Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond for Reliance contended at the outset that there seemed to be no challenge to the agreements entered into between Star and Netflix.As for the challenge against the alleged non-compliance of clauses, Dhond submitted that Reliance had all ancillary, non-theatrical rights for the first 10 years after theatrical release of the film. .The OTT platforms argued that they had been granted rights through agreements which were not under challenge, and much prior in time to the consent terms between Mad Man and Reliance. They also contended that Mad Man’s contractual rights would begin only after 10 years, till which time Reliance had exclusive rights. In view of this, Mad Man had no locus to even file the present suit for infringement of copyright, it was submitted..After considering all submissions, Justice RI Chagla was of the opinion that Netflix and Star already had antecedent rights, both digital and satellite, and that Mad Man could not claim IP rights over such rights.Additionally, the Court noted that Mad Man could commence exploiting its rights over the film only after the expiry of the first 10 years, during which Reliance had exclusive rights. In view of this, the Court rejected ad-interim relief to Mad Man. The order stated,"Thus, I am of the prima facie view, the Plaintiff has made out no case for seeking ad-interim relief by way of injunction restraining the Defendant No. 1, and/or Defendant No. 4 and Defendant No. 5 from exploiting the subject film in accordance with their antecedent rights and particularly, during the period of the First Cycle.".The Court also rejected a request from Tulzapurkar to restrain Netflix and Star India from releasing the film 83 for a period of one week..For Mad Man, Tulzapurkar was briefed by Advocates Sameer Pandit and Anuj Jain from Wadia Ghandy & Co.Dhond was briefed by Advocates Prasad Shenoy, Saket Mone, Abhishek Salian and Devansh Shah from Vidhii Partners for Reliance.Senior Advocate Sharan Jagtiani with Advocate Ashish Kamath briefed by Advocates Thomas George, Tanvi Sinha, Mudit Tayal, Priyank, Aishwarya Parameshwaran and Vismay Malkan from Saikrishna Associates appeared for Netflix and Star India..[Read order]