Vendhar Movies v. Joint Director & Ors.
(2019) 5 Mad LJ 520 : (2019) 68 GSTR 372 : (2019) 28 GSTL 545 : (2020) 1 CTC 353
In the High Court of Madras
W.P. 30085/2018
Before Justice Anita Sumanth
Decided on April 16, 2019

Relevancy of the case: Transfer of a part of the copyrighted film by the producers to television channels

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Copyright Act, 1957 (Sections 13, 21)
• The Finance Act, 1994 (Section 65) 

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The petitioners were primarily engaged in the production of cinematographic films.
• The petitioners agreed with the respondents regarding theatrical distribution, visual recording accompanying soundtrack, and other film features.
• Additionally, certain copyrights persisted concerning cinematograph films which the petitioner assigned to the respondent. 
• The Service Tax Department faced the challenge of 5 writ petitions filed against the show cause notice issued to cinematograph film producers. In this case, they assigned parts of their copyright in the films to television channels. The present suit is accordingly about interpreting the agreement regarding the copyright transfer.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates 

• The petitioner’s counsel argued that they own a bundle of rights owing to the ownership of the cinematograph film, which consists of several assets with concurrently existing copyrights. Furthermore, he argued that subject to the condition of timely payment, the assignment of the rights was permanent.
• The respondent’s counsel submitted that the petitioners have assigned only specific copyrights while retaining other copyrights in the same cinematograph film themselves. Thus, the transfer is ‘temporary’ in nature. All rights concerning the film should be transferred to constitute a permanent transfer.

Opinion of the Bench

• Upon perusal of the Copyright Act, the cinematograph film holds a copyright of its own right.
• However, a film comprises various smaller but equally important components and therefore, a cinematograph film is a ‘bundle of rights’. 
• Since the petitioner had transferred one such right to the assignee, it would constitute a permanent transfer of copyright in respect of such right.

Final Decision

• The High Court allowed the writ petitions.

Satvik Mishra, an undergraduate student at the Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab, prepared this case summary during his internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2022.