[ad_1]
New Delhi, Delhi High Court has directed the accumulated music composer R Rahman and the makers of the film ‘Ponyin Selvan 2’. 2 crore with the court after a copyright trial on the classical rendering of Junior Dagar Brothers on the classical rendering of ‘Shiv Stuti’.
In an interim order passed on 25 April, Justice Prasathiba M Singh ruled that from the point of view of a listener, the original of Rahman’s song ‘Veera Raja Veera’ in the film was not just inspired, but in fact, equally, ‘Shiva Stuity’ notes, emotions and exciting effects.
The judge said that this was a violation of the rights of the original musicians of the music tribute to Lord Shiva.
The court directed the insertion of a slide in the film on all OTT and online platforms, so that the late Ustad N of the Junior Dagar brothers. Fayazuddin Dagar and late Ustad Zahiruddin Dagar could be credited for the composition, and also honored. Family members of the late artists have cost 2 lakhs as cost.
Ustad Fayaz Vasifuddin Dagar, son of Fayazuddin Dagar and nephew of Zaheeruddin Dagar, said in the trial that he organized a copyright in all the original works of Junior Dar brothers including ‘Shiv Stuity’, which the defense had illegally violated.
“In the final analysis, therefore, this court believes that the song composed is not only inspired or motivated by the suit composition Shiva Stuti, but in fact, the song is just like a suit composition with a change in the song. The song used by adding other elements can be presented more like a modern composition, but basically works as music.”
“Therefore the composition of the defendant violates the rights of the plaintiff in Shiv Stuti.”
Defendant Rahman, Madras Talkies and Laika Productions will be deposited 2 crores with the court and the same will be placed in a certain deposit, subject to the final result of the case, HC clarified.
It states that the plaintiff had a prima facie case for copyright violations by the defendants and if an interim order was not passed in his favor, “irreplaceable injury would be due to the creative rights and moral rights of the original musicians who are no longer alive”.
“The defendant number 1 that has earned a global praise, initially did not give any recognition for the work of the plaintiff. When the plaintiff contacted defendant number 1, the acknowledgment was reluctant,” it was said.
The court said, “defendants numbers 6 and 7 who have sung impused are disciples of the plaintiff.
The balance of convenience is thus in favor of the plaintiff because once films and songs lose their audience until the test is over, the plaintiff would have lost any possibility of effective acknowledgment, it said.
Rahman’s lawyer argued that ‘Shiva Stuti’ was based on the traditional Dhrupad style that was in a public domain, and since it was not original in the manner of singing and composition, it was not capable of copyright protection.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without amending the text.
[ad_2]
