Page 261 - DLIS001_FOUNDATION_OF_LIBRARY_AND_INFORMATION_SCIENCE

Foundation of Library and Information Science

Notes
The author Chetan Bhagat claims that the attribution (or rather the lack of it) to his book
in the movie has been rather “unfair”. Pre-release, the makers made press statements like
the movie is only ‘very loosely’, ‘2%-5% inspired by the book’. After release, those who
have read the book and seen the movie find the film to be an adaptation of Five Point
Someone. The setting, characters, plotline, dramatic twists and turns, one-liners, theme,
message – almost all aspects that make up the story are from FPS. Yes, there are some
changes, any adaptation requires that – but it is no way an original story.

The Key Facts/Issues
1. Bhagat entered into a contract with the production house (Vinod Chopra Films Pvt
Ltd), under which he assigned all rights in any audio visual format of the book or its
adaptation to the production house.
2. As consideration, Bhagat was to be paid a certain sum of money (totalling about ` 11
lakhs or so). The facts appear to indicate that he was paid this sum in full and Bhagat
does not contest this in his blog post either. So this is not really about the money.
3. Bhagat was also promised credit in the film.
Since the Clause 4 states that:

It shall be obligatory on the part of the Producer to accord credit to the author in the
rolling credits of any audio-visual moving image software (of any format or form in any
media or medium) produced by the Producer in terms of the exercise and execution of the
Rights granted as under:

“Based on the Novel
Five Point Someone
By
Chetan Bhagat”
This clause appears to have been “technically” complied with, as the credits right at the
end of the film do mention the fact that the movie is based on the book by Bhagat in
exactly the form that clause 4 requires. However, the placement of this credit was not
prominent and appeared to be rather fleeting.
Moral Rights and Lack of Attribution
Bhagat claims that in the pre-release publicity and even post the movie, the makers of the
movie made statements to the effect that the movie was not really based on the book and
that it was “original”. Most damagingly perhaps, the makers claim that the movie was
only based on the book to a paltry extent of 3-5%; if what Bhagat states is true, he has a
decent case on moral rights against the makers of the movie. Section 57 of the Indian
copyright act vests every author with the right to insist that their works be attributed to
them. And this right exists independent of the “economic” right to exploit the work. In
essence, the section states that “...independently of the author’s copyright and even after the
assignment either wholly or partially of the said copyright, the author of a work shall have the right to
claim the authorship of the work ... “
In other words, even if the economic rights are assigned away (and in this case, Bhagat
assigned away his rights to any movie based on the book), the moral rights continue to
vest in the author. The question now is: is it true that Bhagat’s book only contributed 3-5%
to the movie. Or was the movie based substantially on the book?
Therefore, what they created is also “original”, unlike what Chetan claims. However,
their originality does not detract from the fact that they have also, in the process, lifted a
Contd....

256 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY