Novelization Of Screenplay And Ownership Of Copyright The Dilemma Surrounding The Copyright Of Satyajit Ray’s Nayak

The case of RDB and Co. HUF v. HarperCollins Publishers India Pvt. Ltd. involved a dispute over the copyright ownership of the screenplay of the Bengali film “Nayak” and the right to novelize it. The Delhi High Court delivered a landmark ruling, stating that the screenplay was solely the work of Satyajit Ray, the film’s writer and director. Consequently, the right to novelize the screenplay belonged to Ray, and after his death, it passed to his son, Sandip Ray, and the Society for Preservation of Satyajit Ray Archives (SPSRA).

The plaintiff, RDB and Co. Hindu Undivided Family, argued that the novelization and publication of the screenplay violated their copyright. They claimed to hold the copyright in the film, including all indirect, derivative, and related rights. The defendant, HarperCollins Publishers India Pvt. Ltd., countered that Ray was the original copyright owner of the screenplay under the Copyright Act. The central question was whether the screenplay writer or the film producer owned the copyright.

The court ruled that Ray was an independent contractor, not an employee of the producer, and thus Section 17(c) of the Copyright Act, which grants copyright ownership to employers, did not apply. Instead, Ray was deemed the first author and owner of the screenplay’s copyright. While the plaintiff retained copyright over the film itself, the court recognized the script and screenplay as separate “literary” works. Therefore, the producer owned the cinematographic work, while Ray held the copyright to the script and screenplay.

Regarding the novelization of the screenplay, the court clarified that it did not constitute “adaptation” unless the screenplay was abridged or converted into a dramatic work. As a result, the producer did not possess the right to authorize novelization.

The court also concluded that the defendant had not used any part of the film itself, which belonged to the plaintiff. Only the screenplay and still photographs, classified as underlying works, were utilized, and the producer did not own the copyright to them.

In summary, the court’s decision established Ray as the copyright owner of the screenplay, distinct from the film, and recognized Sandip Ray and SPSRA as the successors to that right. It clarified that novelization required the copyright owner’s authorization and emphasized the distinction between the film’s copyright and the underlying works. This case reaffirmed the importance of distinguishing between different components of a film and respecting the rights of authors of underlying works.