Mere Similarities Do Not Attract S.14 Of Copyright Act: Kerala High Court Dismisses Appeal Moved By Broadcasters Of Sitcom 'Uppum Mulakum'

The Kerala High Court has dismissed an appeal moved by the broadcasting team of the popular Malayalam sitcom 'Uppum Mulakum' seeking an injunction on the telecasting of another programme which was allegedly an imitation of the appellant's programme. 

Justice P. Somarajan observed that although copyright is intended to protect one's work, that does not stop others from adopting the very same theme so long as the theme has an individual quality of its own with an element of innovation from the creator apart from the general theme and its natural sequences.

"The matter of sequence that can be originated may sometimes be similar to the copyright claimed by the other party and it would not fall under the broad spectrum of violation of the copyright. It has to be read along with the case that they did not have any case of verbatim reproduction of their programme in the disputed episodes."

The Court was adjudicating upon a dispute between two channels over the programmes 'Uppum Mulakum' and 'Erivum Puliyum'.

'Uppum Mulakum' is a prominent sitcom that aired first in 2015. It had attracted wide appreciation from the viewers and thereby became one of the stellar programs telecasted by the appellants. It portrays the daily life of an ordinary Hindu household and the issues among the family members. 

However, in 2021, the respondent aired four episodes with the very same cast and roles from 'Uppum Mulakum' with the same theme of a Hindu household. Thus, a notice was issued to the respondents to stop their programme and further telecast.

Thereafter, the respondent changed the name of their programme and the entire theme was changed to a Christian Anglo-Indian family with the very same actors resembling the characters in "Uppum Mulakum". 

This dispute had resulted in a suit for mandatory and permanent prohibitory injunction before the trial court.

The appellants herein had also sought a temporary injunction from telecasting and airing 'Erivum Puliyum' which according to them was an imitation of their programme 'Uppum Mulakum'.

The trial court granted an injunction in part on the four episodes which were already telecasted. However, it refused to grant an injunction for the remaining part of the programme that may be aired and telecasted in future.

Aggrieved by this, the appellants moved the High Court. Their primary argument is that the respondent has no right to proceed with their programme by the name "Erivum Puliyum" since there is a close resemblance of their stellar programme, especially since the cast is played by the very same actors in their programme. 

The appellants argued that this may cause reasonable doubt as to its identity, that the viewers may perceive both programmes to be the same. 

Therefore, it was submitted that the act of the respondents would squarely come under the purview of Section 14(a)(vi) of the Copyright Act.

Although they argued that there is a close resemblance of the theme employed by the respondents, the Court held that this is not sufficient in order to bring out a case of violation of copyright.

Moreover, the appellants did not have a case that there was a verbatim reproduction or adaptation of their programme in the episodes of the respondents' programme. 

As observed by the Apex Court, there cannot be any copyright in an idea, subject matter, themes, plots, or historical or legendary facts; in such a situation, the violation of copyright will stand confined only to the form, manner, arrangement and expression of the idea by the author of the copyrighted work.

Therefore, the Single Judge found that the legal position was crystal clear on the issue. When something is incorporated as a new version or a new idea apart from the general plot, the user of the newly invented/ incorporated idea alone would stand capable of bringing the matter within the purview of violation of copyright. Otherwise, there cannot be any violation at all.

The Court reiterated that when an idea originated or developed from a common source, similarities are bound to occur, and unless the fundamental or substantial aspects of the mode of expression adopted in the copyrighted work, the same cannot be brought under the purview of violation.

"Mere employment of very same actors in a different atmosphere, though it is pertaining to the day-to-day life of a family may not by itself bring the matter within the sweep of the copyright as defined under Section 14, especially when one is dealing with a Hindu family and the other one is dealing with a Christian Anglo-Indian family."

It emphasised that mere similarities will not come under the purview of copyright as made mentioned in Section 14 of the Copyright Act unless it satisfies the various clauses incorporated therein.

The Court also found that there can not be an interim temporary injunction with respect to a matter constituting minute details, which cannot be put under the surveillance by the Court. In such cases, the remedy is by way of damages, if any, sustained and not the grant of an interlocutory order of injunction.

Therefore, the trial court was directed to expedite the disposal of the suit untrammelled by any of the observations made herein within six months from the next posting of the suit.

The appeal was accordingly dismissed. 

Advocates C. Unnikrishnan, Ananda Padmanabhan, Mahesh Chandran, Deepa Jose George, M.R. Sudheendran, Uthara A.S, Vijaykrishnan S. Menon and Saritha Nandanan appeared for the appellants. 

Advocates Santhosh Mathew, Harindranath, Vijay V. Paul, Gokul Asok, Wafa Khatheeja and Sheryl Elizabeth Sebastian represented the respondents in the matter. 

Case Title: Suryansh Broadcasting Pvt Ltd & Anr v. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd & Anr.

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ker) 179

Click Here To Read/Download The Order