Opinion Some points about rights

Enter “moral rights”,stage left. Apparently,when you buy a novel or DVD at a store,although you’ve perhaps bought a limited licence to read or watch the work,the author of the work is still entitled to certain moral or non-pecuniary rights that cannot,by law,be contracted away. Yale Law scholar,Henry Hansmann,would argue that “moral rights” consist of four distinct rights: first,the right of integrity,by which an author can prevent her work from being defaced or defiled; second,paternity by which an author can insist that her name be associated with her work; third,disclosure,by which an author can insist that the work not be displayed to the public until it is ready; and fourth,retraction,by which an author can withdraw the work from the public domain. The 3 Idiots controversy seems to concern the second of these rights,that is,the right of “paternity” or “attribution” which is perhaps the most closely interrelated with legal copyright protections. Interestingly,Indian copyright law recognises the author’s “special right” to claim authorship of a work,while moral rights have to some extent been recognised by Indian courts,most notably by the Delhi high court.

The next time you read War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy or My Name is Red by Orhan Pamuk,notice that the author of the work is actually the person who has translated it to its present form. Translation requires sophisticated and imaginative thinking; but you rarely see these works passed off as those of Constance Garnett or Erdag Goknar,accomplished as their translations may be,without the author’s name displayed prominently across the title page. Should 3 Idiots,or an alleged act of “translating” or adapting a novel to film,be any different?

On the other hand,one wonders how the presumed correctness of Bhagat’s claims would impact the universe of talent orbiting Bollywood. If producers are required to assign proportionate or “due” credit to each of several composers,lyricists,writers,and choreographers who worked on a film,then assessing the contribution of each individual would entail intricately complex analysis. Ghost-writers,writing for politicians or celebrities,would be forced to negotiate their rates down if they were permitted by law to claim authorship to the work in the future and discredit the personality that signs off on the autobiography. What of those in the employment of others? Employees are routinely required to sign agreements by which they assign all intellectual property to employers — would the employee’s ability to claim moral rights in the use of the employer’s intellectual property not work to reduce the price that the employee can get for his/ her efforts?

Following the illustrious list of novelists whose works have been converted to film,(consider Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings,J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter,and Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code) one can quite understand an author’s consternation at not being accorded enough recognition,with its concomitant bragging rights,in a movie’s credits. However,one wonders if the present debate doesn’t underestimate the intelligence of the average Indian movie-goer. After all,we do not need court orders to tell us that many Indian movies and songs have been “inspired” by offshore cinema. It is certainly not inconceivable that the average Indian movie-goer will read the book,watch the movie,and give credit where it is deserved.

The writer is a Los Angeles-based attorney

express@expressindia.com