A.R. Rahman Faces Copyright Ruling: Delhi High Court Orders Deposit in ‘Shiva Stuti’ Case
Table of Contents
- 1. A.R. Rahman Faces Copyright Ruling: Delhi High Court Orders Deposit in ‘Shiva Stuti’ Case
- 2. ruling Details and implications
- 3. Copyright Protection for Hindustani Classical Music
- 4. Arguments Against Strict Copyright Enforcement
- 5. Practical Implications for U.S. Artists and Producers
- 6. FAQ: Copyright and Music in the U.S.
- 7. Given the ruling’s emphasis on copyright protection for Hindustani classical music, how might it influence future collaborations between artists from diverse musical backgrounds?
- 8. Copyright Clash: Archyde Interviews Legal Expert on A.R. Rahman’s Copyright Ruling
- 9. Introduction
- 10. Understanding the Ruling
- 11. Implications for Hindustani Classical Music
- 12. The Challenge of copyright in the U.S.
- 13. practical Advice for Artists
- 14. Fair Use and Creative Freedom
- 15. Conclusion and Invitation
April 26,2025
NEW DELHI – the Delhi High Court issued an interim order Friday against acclaimed music director A.R. Rahman regarding the song “Veera Raja Veera” from the Tamil film “Ponniyin Selvan 2” (PS2). The court sided with Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar,a distinguished classical singer,in a copyright infringement suit,determining that the song was “identical” to Dagar’s family composition,‘Shiva Stuti,’ albeit with “certain changes.”
Justice Prathiba M. Singh directed Rahman adn Madras Talkies, the movie’s production company, to correct the song’s credits to specifically acknowledge Nasir Zahiruddin and Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar, the junior Dagar brothers.The court emphasized that the song had previously been attributed solely to the Dagarvani tradition.
Furthermore, the court ordered Rahman and madras Talkies to deposit ₹2 crore (approximately $240,000 USD) with the court’s registry, along with ₹2 lakh (approximately $2,400 USD) to the Dagars to cover legal costs.
ruling Details and implications
according to Justice Singh, “This court holds that the impugned song is not merely based or inspired from the song composition of Shiva Stuti but is exact identical to the song composition with mere changes.”
The court further noted that Rahman and his company initially failed to recognize the Dagars’ contribution. “When the plaintiff (Dagar) contacted defendant number 1, the acknowledgement was given albeit reluctantly,” the bench stated.
The High Court mandated that,”In place of the existing slide,a new slide will be made on all OTTs and online platforms in respect of the impugned song affecting the credits.” The revised credit will read: “Composition based on Shiva Stuti by late Ustad N Faiyazuddin Dagar and late Ustad Zahiruddin Dagar.” A detailed judgment is expected to follow.
Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, a Padma Shri awardee (one of India’s highest civilian honors), filed the suit, asserting that “Veera Raja Veera’s” composition was copied from “Shiva Stuti,” created by his father, Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar, and uncle, Zahiruddin Dagar. The suit argued that despite lyrical differences, the songs share a virtually identical musical structure, rhythm, and beat.
Copyright Protection for Hindustani Classical Music
Justice Singh’s verdict affirmed that Hindustani classical music is eligible for copyright protection under the Copyright Act, provided it represents the composer’s original work. “So long as the composition in the Hindustani classical music is an original work of the composer,the same would be entitled to protection under the Copyright Act. The composer would also be entitled to exercise all rights under the rights,” the court ruled.
this decision could have significant implications for the U.S. music industry, where sampling and musical inspiration are common practices. While U.S. copyright law also protects original musical compositions, the line between inspiration and infringement can be blurry, often leading to complex and costly legal battles.
For example, the case *williams v. Bridgeport Music, Inc.* (2015), involving robin Thicke’s “Blurred Lines,” highlighted the challenges of determining copyright infringement based on musical style and feel rather than direct copying.The verdict against Thicke sparked controversy and raised concerns about the potential chilling effect on musical creativity.
| Case | Plaintiff | Defendant | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Williams v. Bridgeport Music, Inc. (“Blurred Lines”) | Marvin Gaye Estate | Robin thicke,Pharrell Williams | Found guilty of copyright infringement; awarded millions in damages. |
| Luminous Tunes Music Corp. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd. (“My Sweet Lord”) | Bright Tunes Music Corp. | George Harrison | Found guilty of subconscious plagiarism. |
Arguments Against Strict Copyright Enforcement
Some argue that strict enforcement of copyright laws in music can stifle creativity and innovation. they contend that music builds upon previous works, and overly restrictive copyright laws can hinder artists’ ability to sample, remix, and create new music. This perspective suggests that a balance must be struck between protecting artists’ rights and fostering a vibrant and evolving musical landscape.
However, proponents of strong copyright protection argue that it is essential for incentivizing artists to create original works and for protecting their financial interests.They believe that without adequate copyright protection, artists may be less likely to invest time and resources in creating new music, ultimately harming the creative ecosystem. Recent movements advocating for fair compensation for artists on streaming platforms underscore this argument.
Practical Implications for U.S. Artists and Producers
This ruling serves as a reminder to U.S. artists and producers to exercise caution when drawing inspiration from existing musical works, especially those from different cultural traditions. Thoroughly researching the origins of musical elements and seeking legal advice are crucial steps to avoid potential copyright infringement claims.
The increasing globalization of music and the ease of access to diverse musical traditions through the internet also increase the risk of unintentional copyright infringement. Therefore, U.S. artists and producers must be diligent in respecting the intellectual property rights of musicians from around the world.
FAQ: Copyright and Music in the U.S.
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What constitutes copyright infringement in music? | Copyright infringement occurs when someone uses a considerable portion of a copyrighted song without permission. this includes copying the melody, harmony, rhythm, or lyrics. |
| what is “fair use” in music copyright? | “Fair use” allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission for purposes such as criticism, commentary, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. |
| How can I avoid copyright infringement when sampling music? | obtain a license from the copyright holder of the original song before using any portion of it in your own work. Services like Harry Fox agency can definitely help with this. |
| How long does copyright protection last for a musical work in the U.S.? | For works created after 1977, copyright protection generally lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. |
| What are the penalties for copyright infringement in the U.S.? | Penalties can include monetary damages, injunctions (stopping the infringing activity), and, in some cases, criminal charges. |
Given the ruling’s emphasis on copyright protection for Hindustani classical music, how might it influence future collaborations between artists from diverse musical backgrounds?
Copyright Clash: Archyde Interviews Legal Expert on A.R. Rahman’s Copyright Ruling
Introduction
Archyde: Welcome, everyone, to Archyde News. Today, we’re diving deep into the recent Delhi High Court ruling involving A.R. Rahman and the song “Veera raja Veera,” which has significant implications for copyright law, especially regarding musical compositions. Joining us is Ms. Anya Sharma,a renowned intellectual property lawyer specializing in music copyright. Ms. Sharma, thank you for being with us.
Understanding the Ruling
archyde: The court found significant similarities between “Veera Raja Veera” and Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar’s “Shiva Stuti.” Could you break down the specifics and why this constitutes copyright infringement?
Anya Sharma: Certainly. The court determined that the Rahman composition was “identitical” to the ‘Shiva Stuti,’ showcasing virtually identical musical structures, rhythmic patterns, and beat, even with minor adjustments. The crux of the infringement lies in using a substantial portion of the original copyrighted work without permission, essentially a derivative work that copies the original in too close a form. Essentially, the court found that the essence of the original Hindustani classical composition, the ‘Shiva Stuti’ was used and formed the basis of the song by A.R. Rahman’s team.
Implications for Hindustani Classical Music
Archyde: The court’s affirmation of copyright protection for Hindustani classical music seems pivotal. What impact is this decision anticipated to have on the Indian music industry and, potentially, globally?
Anya Sharma: This ruling is a watershed moment. It establishes a clear precedent: Hindustani classical compositions are eligible for copyright, provided they are original works. This strengthens the rights of classical musicians and composers, ensuring they receive due recognition and compensation. Globally, it underscores the need for respect for diverse musical traditions and intellectual property rights, particularly in an era of global musical exchange and digital music platforms.
The Challenge of copyright in the U.S.
Archyde: The article highlights the challenges of copyright in the U.S. music industry and cases such as *”Blurred Lines”* and the blurry lines between inspiration & infringement. How does the U.S. approach to musical copyright differ, and what lessons, if any, can be learned from this ruling?
anya Sharma: The U.S. system also protects original musical compositions,but the line between inspiration and infringement is frequently enough blurry,as you correctly noted. A key difference here is the clear acknowledgement of Hindustani classical music as copyrightable. The “Veera Raja Veera” case, offers a straightforward cautionary tale: artists must be thorough in their research and legal due diligence to ensure they are not infringing on existing copyrights. This is especially true when drawing inspiration from global traditions where cultural sensitivity and understanding are imperative.
practical Advice for Artists
Archyde: What practical steps should U.S. artists and producers take to avoid copyright infringement?
Anya Sharma: Firstly, thorough research.Investigate the origins, musical elements, of any composition you are looking to use. Secondly, obtain proper licenses and seek legal advice from experienced copyright lawyers to navigate the complexity of music copyrights. Services like Harry Fox Agency can simplify licensing. also, when using inspiration from other cultures, tread carefully. Understand the source’s nuances, respecting its heritage.
Fair Use and Creative Freedom
Archyde: Strict copyright, as some argue, may stifle creativity and innovation. Is there a balance to strike between protecting artists’ rights and allowing for creative freedom?
Anya Sharma: absolutely. Fair use principles carve out space for criticism, commentary, and education, fostering creativity. This ruling underlines the necessity of the rights of those who composed the original pieces, which should not hinder the creative work of any artist. striking a balance involves ensuring artists are fairly compensated for their original work while allowing for sampling and innovation.
Conclusion and Invitation
Archyde: Ms. Sharma, that has been insightful. Thank you. Do you have any final comments for our readers?
Anya Sharma: The “Veera Raja Veera” case serves as a reminder of the complexities of music copyright. The digital age has made data accessible, and respecting intellectual property is even more critical. I urge everyone to reflect on the value of original musical compositions. how do you think this ruling will change the way artists approach sampling and inspiration? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
