Originally posted by: return_to_hades
Alright I've been doing some more reading on the issue. There are two perspective legal and ethical. There are also some nuances of the Indian film industry that one needs to be aware of. Based on that here is my opinion.
Whether inspired or based on a book, the movie makers need to obtain rights on the book (unless the book is copyright expired). The author of the book needs to be credited in either opening or end credits.
Chetan Bhagat has been given credit that the movie was inspired by his story. Legally his argument holds no ground. Ethically, he has reason to be miffed because his book has not been prominently acknowledged.
For example in Hollywood when movies are based on books trailer voice overs and advertisements often advertise 'based on award winning novel' or something on similar grounds. He is right in expecting more prominent placement like this.
However, it is important to note that Twilight and Harry Potter series both do not acknowledge Meyer or Rowling in opening credits, or in trailers/posters. They put it credit as a small end blurb. Being so popular everyone knows that the movies were based on books. So on the flip side Bhagat is at a loss for not being as prominent.
Even 300 and Sin City did not have prominent acknowledgments. Many people still don't know that they are based on Frank Millers graphic novels. However, Frank Miller is very comfortable with his narrow comic con type niche fan base and does not feel every movie goer needs to know who he is. So on the flip side Bhagat is not content with his readership.
Bhagat makes an interesting point in his blog that the even though the credits acknowledge him and his novel, the film still credits the story to Raju Hirani and Abhijit Joshi. He feels that if it is based on his novel he should receive a place in the credits for story. He is alright with them having full credit for screenplay, but holds objection that he is excluded from the story.
This is where the nuances of intellectual property come in. This is a very complicated fuzzy grey area across the world.
If someone reads a book, watches a show or movie and is inspired to rewrite a story based on that - who gets credit for the new story? If the original creator is acknowledged does the new story creator have to give story credit too to the original author? I mean is there any finite way we can split creativity in proportions to share?
Chetan Bhagat has no legal claims because he did sell the rights to his book. But ethically he does have a claim. Now Hirani and Joshi are professionals, but I wanted to share a perspective from an ordinary person. I've written fan fictions, some which were inspired by movies. I acknowledge the inspiration. However, the story of the fan fiction, the adaptation, the characterization, the penning it in a new style was done completely by me. Perhaps there is some moral obligation with me crediting the story to the original too. But I don't like the idea of sharing the creative credit with someone who was absolutely not involved in my creative process. I completely empathize with Hirani and Joshi being unwilling to credit Bhagat for their creative process in adapting the story for the screenplay. Even if adapted from Bhagat's novel. This story is their creative baby. It is their inspiration based on the book. If the book is credited to him, why share any other credit?
There was a time fan fiction was a victim to a lot of intellectual property claims. Fan fiction sites were sued and shut down because Movie, book and TV producers claimed the characters as intellectual property and that the fan fic authors had no creative rights over them. Over time people realized the importance of fan fiction and let people use their characters.
The funny thing is most fan fiction is illegal. The Zee Sony makers could actually come and shut down the fan fiction section and sue IF for profiting through a channel that violates their intellectual property. These characters are in fics are owned by show producers and unless the writer 'bought' the right to write a story. They are committing a crime. Even if they disclaim that they do not own the characters, they can be liable. Although some ordinary teenager who wrote a fiction to pay tribute to her favorite character would be alarmed and find it bogus if Ekta kapoor legally chased her. Grey areas of intellectual property.
Music industry has similar dilemma - who has rights to fan vids, mash ups etc. Who gets the credit? How legal/illegal are they? If some teenager had the ingenuity to mash up Eminem and Lady Gaga and set it up to a Tellytubby dance - is it his creativity or is it the creativity of Eminem Lady Gaga and Tellytubby makers.
Anupamaa
