Copyright over real-life events: Telangana High Court order restraining release of 'Jhund' challenged in Supreme Court

An appeal has been filed in the Supreme challenging an October 19 order of the Telangana High Court restraining the telecast of the Amitabh Bachchan starrer 'Jhund' across India and abroad (M/S Super Cassettes Industries Pvt Ltd v. Nandini Chinni Kumar & Ors). .The petition has raised an important question concerning copyright law in India, namely whether true life events of a real person which are already in public domain can be considered 'property' which can be brought and sold and whether the same will be entitled to copyright protection. .The appellant, Super Cassettes Industries Private Limited (known as T-Series), has claimed that their movie Jhund is based on the life of football coach, Vijay Barse who is portrayed in the film by Amitabh Bachchan. Hence, it has been submitted the High Court was wrong to grant an injunction against the release of film on the assumption that there is copyright infringement in the life story of one Akhilesh Paul, who was the captain of the Indian Slum Soccer team coached by Barse. .The litigation was initiated by independent filmmaker Nandi Chinni Kumar, who claimed that he had purchased the right to make a movie about the life of Akhilesh Paul..Paul had appeared on the television show Satyameva Jayate, hosted by Bollywood actor Aamir Khan. Kumar had watched the show and approached Paul to make his life story into a movie and permission was granted for the same for a monetary consideration. .In April 2018, Kumar came to know that the life of Vijay Barse was being made into a movie by the appellant, Super Cassettes.Kumar then approached the civil court contending that the movie 'Jhund' will have substantial elements from the life of Paul, on whose life story Kumar owns copyright. .The trial court, on September 17, 2020, ruled in favour of Kumar and restrained Super Cassettes from exhibiting the movie. This order was upheld by the Telangana High Court on October 19, leading to the present appeal before the apex court..The appellant, Super Cassettes, has submitted that 'Jhund' is not so much about Akhilesh Paul as it is about his coach, Vijay Barse. It has been contended that the film does not deal with Paul, but with the tale of small-time criminals in slums who win a soccer tournament.."Jhund is inspired by and revolves around the real story of a football coach, Vijay Barse who spotted a group of slum children playing football. Spotting talent and potential in them, Mr. Barse took them under his wing and coached them. The film is 'coach-centric'. The players in the team including its captain are secondary or incidental," the petition states..Further, with a view to avoiding any scope for potential legal issues, the character of the 'team captain' in the film was deliberately fictionalised so as to exclude any identity with Paul, the plea adds. .Importantly, the appellant has raised the issue of whether true life events of a real person can be considered 'property' which can be brought and sold, and if yes, whether the same will get copyright protection debarring anybody else from making a film depicting the said life story. ."Does the Copyright Act, 1957, allows a third party purchaser or assignee to claim monopoly over the real life events that form part of the lives of real persons or over their recollections of their own real lives?", the petition asks..Moreover, it has also been contended that real life events of two persons might be inter-connected. Hence, a third person who purchases the true life events of one person cannot prohibit others from making a film merely because the lives of the two persons in question converged at some point of time. .It is also the appellant's case that historical facts, information, events, or stories and experiences of real persons "cannot be the subject matter of copyright law.".Besides, it has also been claimed by the appellant that an agreement was signed between the two disputing parties on October 21, 2020, for a consideration amount of Rs 1.3 crore, which was paid by the appellant to the respondents with a condition to withdrawn all pending litigation. However, the respondents after agreeing to the arrangement, sought to wriggle out from the same, citing certain differences in the clause of the agreement..The appellants have termed the litigation instituted by the respondents as a "blackmail litigation", as failure to release the movie in November would cause damage to the appellants..The plea will be heard tomorrow by a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde.