New Delhi, Aug 10: A Delhi court has dismissed a complaint seeking lodging of an FIR against the director and producer of movie ‘Jolly LLB' for allegedly infringing copyright of an author of poems on a similar concept of police indulging in corruption as shown in the film.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Sanjay Bansal said the treatment given to the concept of corrupt practices in police stations in the film is totally different from that of the complainant and there is no violation of any copyright.
“The concept that police stations indulge in money making through illegal means cannot be subject of copyright of any particular person. The only copyright which can be acquired is regarding the treatment given to the concept by the author.
“Any person can treat this concept in his own way and can have copyright for that particular treatment or expression. No author can prevent any other person from expressing the said concept in a different way,” the court said. Complainant Dinesh Vats, in his complaint, said he has written a book which is a collection of poems including, ‘Thano ki khuli pol', mentioning about the corrupt practices of police stations.
He alleged that Subhash Kapoor, director of ‘Jolly LLB', and its producer Fox Star Studio India Pvt Ltd have used his concept in the movie and his copyright has been infringed.
He added that he had approached the police to take action against the film director and producer but nothing was done and thereafter he moved the court for registration of an FIR. The court, however, dismissed his complaint saying, “Complainant (Vats) in his poem has expressed the concept i.e. corrupt practices of police stations, in his own words.
“Whereas in the movie scene, the same concept has been expressed in different form. The treatment given to the concept in the movie scene is totally different from that of complainant. There is no similarity between the two.”
The court noted that in the poem, Vats has expressed the concept as to how various police stations indulge in corrupt practices including making money through illegal means.
“Whereas in the movie, in the scene in question, it is depicted that there is an auction of a police station (in Old Delhi). Various police officers desirous of becoming SHO of that police station bid for the police station and the highest bidder is made the SHO of the said police station.
“Complainant alleges this concept of auction of police station has been lifted from his poem and thus his copyright has been infringed,” it said, adding that after seeing the scene in the movie, it is clear that there is no violation of any copyright.
The court also said that the movie scene is regarding an auction of a police station whereas the poem is a critique on working of police stations.
“In the poem, various police stations boast of their incomes and tell their values. The concept expressed in the poem is not copied in the movie scene. Not even a single word of the poem has been used in the movie scene,” it said.
