The second season of the Amazon Prime Video show Made In Heaven landed in a controversy when Dalit author Yashica Dutt took to social media to allege that Radhika Apte's character (Pallavi Menke) in episode five had a stark resemblance to her life and she wasn't credited in the show.
Shortly after, the makers of Made In Heaven 2 - Zoya Akhtar, Reema Kagti, Neeraj Ghaywan and Alankrita Srivastava - released a statement on Instagram denying all of Yashica's allegations.
Now, The Quint spoke to Geetanjali Visvanathan, Partner- Ira Law about the legal implications surrounding the controversy.
'Yashica Can File An Infringement of Copyright Case'
Geetanjali said, "Yashica can say that she hasn't been credited, but it's still a brief idea from her life's story. There may be some resemblance, but I'm not sure if that will take her too far in court. The way I see it, it can only be an infringement of copyright, if at all, but she has to prove that a substantial part of her story has been copied by the makers. Like, if the makers had read her novel and removed a chapter out of it and made it into an episode, but that doesn't seem to be the case here."
'Yashica Can Ask For Damages'
Supreme Court Advocate Nisha Bhambhani told The Quint, "Yashica can take the legal route. She can ask for damages and a part of the profits too if she proves in court that the makers have used distinguishable parts of her life. She can seek an interim stay on the show too. However, the legal process is very long and arduous."
The Makers' Response & How Yashica Reacted to It
Reacting to Yashica's claims, the makers had said, "We categorically deny any claim that Ms Dutt's life or work was appropriated by us."
Read the full statement here:
Speaking to The Quint about the response Yashica had said, "I'm still processing it, but I would like to say that it's very disappointing. I feel that the tone of the response comes from a very condescending and calculated place. All throughout, I've shown nothing but solidarity and support for the episode. I've gone online and said, 'please don't ban this episode, please don't cancel it' and I've been telling people to watch it because it's such an important and significant portrayal of Dalit life on screen in a way we haven't seen before.
I'm the one who has been denied credit, but at the same time I've tried to be as generous and compassionate with my response as possible. On the other hand the makers, who have the backing of one of the world's largest streaming platforms and who represent some of the most powerful people in the film industry, have taken a completely different tone and I wish things could have been better."
She added that she is yet to figure out the next steps.
"I don't want to comment anything on this so quickly, because I need to take time to process this and then figure out the next steps. But the fact is, I asked for credit and that was categorically denied in a very harsh way. Even the viewers said that I should be credited. I released a statement on Monday, 14 August, but the discourse had started before that. So you can't dismiss everyone's opinion and say that the character doesn't bear any resemblance to me. I am not denying that there can be multiple inspirations, but I am just asking that at some level do recognise who this character is based on."
What Is Intellectual Property Rights?
Nisha Bhambhani said, "Intellectual Property rights is a creation by an individual or an entity - be it a trademark, a logo or even a piece of tech. Whether it's a patent on some invention, an idea cannot have an IPR. IPR does not apply to ideas."
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)