Skip to main content

FEATURED POST

IP UNFOLD MONTHLY IP INFO-APRIL, 2025

1. Viva Holdings, along with its 37 subsidiaries, has signed the Ecommerce MOU to strengthen protection of its digital content and retail products against piracy. IPOPHL sees this as a major move encouraging more creatives to protect their IP rights. Viva emphasized that piracy threatens a large portion of its revenue, and stronger collaboration with platforms is crucial for sustaining the creative industry.   2. The USPTO has granted a patent to Ramper, a Web3 startup under Vietnam's Ninety Eight, for its social login feature that simplifies access to Web3 apps using platforms like Google and Facebook. This innovation addresses accessibility barriers in Web3 and signals strong progress for Vietnam’s blockchain sector. The patent also highlights Vietnamese startups’ growing global ambitions in the tech space.   3. The Supreme Court of New Zealand ruled that while copyright is relationship property under the PRA, Sirpa Alalääkkölä retains sole ownership and control of her artwo...

COPYRIGHT VS DEFAMATION





             The recent tussle between the well-known actors Actor Dhanush and  Actor Nayanthara over the use of few seconds of  behind the scenes footage from the movie sets of the movie ‘Nanum Rowdy Thaan’ in her recent Netflix release NAYANTHARA - beyond the fairy tale, is all over the internet. While there are people voicing out in favor of both the actors, this article is only trying to explore the legal aspects involved in this issue.

Firstly, Dhanush being the producer of the above mentioned cinematograph film is the rightful and 1 st owner of the copyrighted work in the absence of any agreement to the contrary. As per the Section 17 of the copyright Act, 1957. Further, Section 14 of the Act is exhaustive of the ways in which an owner of a copyright can exploit his work.

Actor Nayanthara in her public letter addressed to Actor Dhanush was very derogatory in nature and was in many places a personal attack on his character and defamatory in nature. Nevertheless, in the given case Actor Dhanush being the copyright owner has aright to exploit the same. The question now remains whether the damages of rupees 10 Crore claimed by Actor Dhanush is exorbitant. However, it is important to note that the documentary of Actor Nayanthara is a commercial project.

An Amicable settlement between the parties would have been beneficial to both of

them.

In this context I would like to bring to light the Doctrine of fair use.

Doctrine of fair use is an exception to the regular norm under the copyright law. Under the Doctrine of fair use, the law allows to reference or incorporate the work of another author into your own without obtaining permission to do so. Fair use usually applies to non-commercial uses, such as  News reporting, Reviews and Commentary, Research  or educational  purpose and Parody. However, this is a very technical question that the Court decides by looking at the facts of the case. These factors include the purpose of the use, the nature of the work, the amount and how substantial is the portion used, and the effect of the use on the potential market  or value of the copyrighted work.

 In the given case I leave to the reader to ascertain.