Bombay High Court restrains Saregama from infringing copyright of Shemaroo in film 'Disco Dancer' but allows London event

The Bombay High Court on Tuesday temporarily restrained music label Saregama from claiming copyright in the 1982 film 'Disco Dancer' in an infringement suit by Shemaroo Entertainment [Shemaroo Entertainment Limites vs Saregama Limited and Ors]..Justice Manish Pitale observed that prima facie, all rights connected to the film were assigned to Shemaroo by way of an agreement entered into with the producer of the film in 2011. "Having perused the above quoted clauses of the said agreement, this Court finds that prima facie all rights pertaining to the film ‘Disco Dancer’ stood assigned to the plaintiff in terms of the said agreement dated November 11, 2011," the Court recorded.The Court, however, allowed Saregama to organise the stage play 'Disco Dancer - The Musical' to be held in London from November 16 for four days, subject to Saregama depositing the entire collections from the show with the court. .The entertainment company approached the court seeking urgent ad-interim relief after coming across a preview of the stage play 'Disco Dancer - The Musical' to be held and organised in London by Saregama from November 16, 2022 for four days.Through Senior Advocate Dr. Birendra Saraf, Shemaroo claimed that by staging the musical, Saregama was infringing its rights as per an agreement between Shemaroo and Babbar Subhash, the film's producer, executed in 2011.Saraf told the court that when the defendants were issued a legal notice, they claimed to have rights to stage a musical drama since around September 2019. Hence, he sought a direction to the defendants to furnish a copy of the agreement based on which they claimed such rights..On the other hand, Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond for Saregama claimed that there were agreements related to the rights in the film in their favour since the year 1982. Based on these agreements, he contended that the Saregama was entitled to exploit dramatic works of the film. He added that the agreement referred to by the plaintiff showed that the film's producer had only assigned rights in the cinematographic film ‘Disco Dancer’ and not rights pertaining to adaptation or staging of musicals or dramas.He claimed that one RG studios had obtained the rights to a musical theatrical adaptation to the film in 2018, which were then transferred to one Gravity Zero Entertainment before finally being transferred to Saregama in 2019.Further, he told the court that information about the musical was in the public domain since September and argued that even if the plaintiff had indeed made out a prima facie case, it had approached the court at the eleventh hour which meant that the balance of convenience was in favour of Saregama.Lastly, he stated that the theater in London had been booked for about a week and the production cost had reached a figure of about ₹4.34 crores, involving a number of artists and, therefore, that granting any temporary injunction would not be in the interest of justice..The Court held that the 2011 agreement between the plaintiff and the film's producer covered adaptations of the film in various manners, including dramas and musicals based on the content, story line and characters of the film.Further, it observed that the rights in the agreement executed between Saregama and the producer in 1982, which was renewed in 2010, pertained to recordings of performances of musical nature and sound tracks.Thereafter, the Court noted that the although the agreements of 2018 and 2019 between RG Studios, Gravity Zero Entertainment and the plaintiff referred to adaptation rights and right towards musical theatrical adaptation of the film, they were insignificant given that the plaintiff had obtained all rights in 2011.Hence, it held that the plaintiff had made a prima facie case in its favour and unless temporary injunction was granted, it would continue to suffer loss due to infringement of its intellectual property rights. Noting that the musical was scheduled to commence the next day, that heavy productions costs were incurred, and that artists were already engaged, the Court determined that an order restraining the event would not be appropriate. Equities could be balanced with appropriate directions, it said."But, a relevant aspect of the matter cannot be ignored, which is that the musical is to be staged in a theater in London from tomorrow i.e. 16.11.2022 for four days in a row, for which the theater is already booked and it is specifically stated on behalf of defendant No.1 that the production cost of about Rs.4.34 crores has already been incurred. More than that, there are artists, who upon being engaged, have practiced and perhaps reached the venue for staging of the musical and granting an order of restrainment even for staging the musical from 16.11.2022 for four days in a row in London may not be appropriate and the equities can be balanced by giving appropriate directions in that regard," the Court stated.Therefore, it temporarily restrained the defendant from infringing the plaintiff's copyright and directed the musical to not be affected subject to Saregama depositing the entire collections from staging of the shows with the court within two weeks after the conclusion of the shows. The Court said that the defendant could apply to it for release of specific amounts towards expenses incurred for hiring staff. It clarified that the payments that the defendant is liable to make to artists and other staff could not be withheld merely because the collections from the show were directed to be deposited with it .[Read Order]