E-Paper
Delhi HC grants relief to AR Rahman in copyright case
The order of April 25 was passed in a copyright infringement suit filed by Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar who said that the “Veera Raja Veera” song composed by Rahman was identical to “Shiva Stuti”
The Delhi high court on Wednesday set aside single judge’s ruling that held that music director AR Rahman’s composition “Veera Raja Veera” for Tamil movie Ponniyin Selvan 2 (PS 2) was identical to ‘Shiva Stuti’, composed by junior Dagar brothers— Ustad Nasir Zahiruddin Dagar and Ustad Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar.
A bench of justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla observed that the single judge — Prathiba M Singh on principle & finding that the junior Dagar brothers had rendered the composition were also the composers.
“We’ve given concurrent opinions. We have held that the single judge has erred on principle & finding on the basis of the material that shows that the junior Dagar brothers had rendered the composition that there is presumption that they were also the composers. We have said that if we hold that the person who renders the composition to be the composer, we will have to rewrite the definition (of “composer” in the Copyright Act) . On that basis without going into the infringement aspect, we have allowed the appeal,” the court said while pronouncing the verdict.
A detailed copy of the judgement is awaited.
The court passed the verdict in Rahman’s appeal challenging justice Singh’s April 25 order. The order of April 25 was passed in a copyright infringement suit filed by Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar, a renowned classical singer, who said that the “Veera Raja Veera” song composed by Rahman was identical to the work “Shiva Stuti” - a traditional Dhrupad composition by his father and uncle - renowned Dagarvani musicians, the late Ustad Nasir Zahiruddin Dagar and Ustad Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar.
The single judge bench in its 117-page ruling dealt extensively on the subject and found that the core of the impugned song “Veera Raja Veera” is not just inspired but is in fact identical in Swaras (notes), Bhava (Emotion) and Aural impact (impact on the ear) of the suit composition Shiva Stuti, from the point of view of a lay listener. On this basis, it allowed the infringement suit.
The judge had directed Rahman and the filmmakers to correct the song credits to specifically acknowledge: “Composition based on Shiva Stuti by Late Ustad Nasir Faiyazuddin Dagar and Late Ustad Nasir Zahiruddin Dagar.”
Previously, credits had only mentioned the Dagarvani tradition rather than the specific artists. Further, justice Singh had also directed Rahman and the production company Madras Talkies to pay ₹2 lakh as damages.
Justice Singh further ruled that compositions in Hindustani classical music are entitled to protection under the Copyright Act as long as they are the composer’s original work.
Challenging these findings, Rahman in his petition asserted that the directions were passed without identification of specific protectable elements present in the suit composition and the judgment misunderstood the structural imperatives of Raagas that inherently lead to substantial similarities between compositions in the same Raaga.
It went on to add that Justice Singh in her order erroneously concluded that the song was authored by Junior Dagar Brothers, despite absence of any evidence indicating the same.
“The impugned judgment has conflated evidence of ‘performance’ with evidence of ‘authorship’ and ‘ownership’ of the musical work/composition,” the petition stated.
