- JUDGMENT SUMMARY: Barbara Taylor Bradford v. Sahara Media Entertainment Ltd.
- DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16 July 2003
- BENCH: A.N. Ray, J. and J. Banerjee, J.
SUBJECT :
FACTS: In the present case, the plaintiff, Barbara Taylor Bradford, was the author of the 1979 best selling book “A Woman of Substance”. She alleged that a TV Serial called “Karishma - The Miracle of Destiny” by the respondents was an infringement of her book. Only 80 episodes of the serial, which was expected to run into more than 200 episodes, had been completed and were ready to be televised. Only the first episode of the serial was broadcasted till then. The theme of both the book and the serial was the rise of a woman from poverty to extreme wealth. The only material with the plaintiff was an interview of the creative director and producer by a journalist wherein he mentioned that the serial has taken the “rags to riches” theme. The story writer, directors, counsels of both the parties denied ever reading the said book. The plaintiff filed a suit before Calcutta High Court praying for an injunction for restraining defendants from airing the serial. Ad interim injunction was granted by the court. The defendants appealed to the higher bench of the court against the decision.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS:
- Section 13 of the Copyright Act,1957.
- Section 13 – Subject Matter of Copyright
ISSUES:
The main issue in question before the court was:
Whether ideas, plots or themes are protected under the provisions of the Copyright Act, 1957?
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGMENT:
Plaintiff’s Contentions: The plaintiff alleged that the serial in question was based on her book and therefore infringed her copyright in her work. The plaintiff claimed that the similarities between both the works were too prominent to be ignored.
Defendant’s Contentions: The defendants contended that the story of the serial was different from the plaintiff’s book and cannot be said to be a copy of it. The defendants argued that their serial was not yet fully filmed and depending on the wishes of the viewers and the requirements of keeping the serial continuously popular, changes might have to be introduced to the story. It was also contended that themes are not the subject matter of copyright under the copyright law, therefore no complaint could be filed in the court for copyright infringement.
Court’s observations:
The Calcutta High Court while explaining the idea/expression dichotomy observed that the law protected originality of expression and not the originality of the central idea due to the balancing of the of two conflicting policies. The first policy was that the law must give protection to the originality of work, thus letting the authors reap the fruits of their labour and stopping dishonest pirates from enjoying those fruits. The second policy was that the protection must not become overprotection, thus, restricting future creativity. If mere plots and characters were to be protected by copyright, an author could not write anything “original” at all, on a similar plot or similar characters.
The court also observed that where a person copied a plot, be it intentionally or not, he must also fabricate into the plot sufficient creations of his own imagination and not a copy of the work which might have been his inspiration in the first place.
The Court ruled against the author and held that there was no evidence of copyright infringement. The court held that the Act protects expressions and not ideas; therefore, the author cannot have a copyright over the idea. Infringement can be established only by comparing and showing similarity of details, events, situations, expressions of language and imagination. The High Court levied a heavy fine on the author for every week’s delay in telecasting the serial.
On an appeal to the Supreme Court by the plaintiff, the High Court’s decision was upheld, but the damages were reversed.
Conclusion:
It can be concluded from the present judgment that no protection is afforded to the ideas, plots or themes under the Copyright Act, 1957. Therefore, ideas, plots or themes are not a subject matter of copyright law.
