“When I heard the music of Krazzy4, I was unmistakenly (sic) reminded of the music of ‘Thump’.” These were the damning words of Justice DG Karnik of Bombay High Court
“When I heard the music of Krazzy4, I was unmistakenly (sic) reminded of the music of ‘Thump’.” These were the damning words of Justice DG Karnik of Bombay High Court that sealed the fate of the Roshans on Thursday in the copyright infringement suit filed by music composer Ram Sampath.
“The fact that a man illiterate in music is reminded of the earlier musical work on hearing the latter (Krazzy4) music is a determinative factor in concluding that the second work is an identical copy or plagiaristic copy of the former work,” the judge concluded.
After the court restrained the Roshans from releasing the film with the “plagiarised” music, producer-director Rakesh Roshan and his composer brother Rajesh Roshan reached an out-of-court settlement with Sampath for a whopping Rs2 crore.
The consent terms paved the way for the release of Krazzy4 as scheduled on April 11, with the court vacating its injunction.
Roshans’ lawyer Arif Bookwala handed over a cheque of Rs1.77 crore (Rs2 crore minus the tax deduction at source) to Sampath’s lawyers Virendra and Virag
Tulzapurkar and TN Daruwalla in the court corridor itself on Thursday evening. The lesson learnt is that even lies have to be consistent. The three SMSes sent by actor Hrithik Roshan to Sampath (reported by DNA on Thursday), after he
alleged plagiarism, undid the Roshans’ case.
Contrary to Hrithik’s SMS claiming to have taken an NOC from Ericsson (for whose advertisement Sampath composed ‘Thump’) to use the music, his composer uncle, Rajesh Roshan, had filed an affidavit claiming to be the author and composer of the music.
Noting that the SMSes were sent by Hrithik on behalf of his father and uncle, the judge held, “The two versions are at variance with each other.” He added, “This dishonesty is another reason disentitling the defendants (Roshans) from claiming that they were bonafidely (sic) using the music.”
The other circumstances that weighed against the Roshans included independent expert Shiv Mathur’s affidavit confirming the allegation of plagiarism and an “indirect admission” by Rajesh Roshan in one of his affidavits that the copy was only a small portion (six seconds) of the music.
Justice Karnik said, “The infringement cannot be determined by the length of the part copied, but whether the part copied is an essential part or the soul of the musical piece... Though a musical work may be of several minutes, a listener remembers the catch or the hook part. If the hook part is copied, then even though the copied part is small, the whole work will amount to actionable infringement.”
Calling the Roshans’ monetary compensation offer of Rs25 lakh to be a “pittance”, Justice Karnik said that the Roshans were earning a minimum of Rs2.5 crore just from the music rights of the film.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}