“Even if an intellectual property is not licensed by its creator, it’s technically theirs if they can prove in a court of law that they were the one to first come up with the creation," Imran Ali, a lawyer who specialises in copyright cases, told The Quint in response to the recent row over Patna-born poet Aamir Aziz's 2020 protest poem 'Sab Yaad Rakha Jayega'.
Nearly five years after Aziz's steadfast words first became a war cry of the anti-CAA protesters, the poem is once again in news after Aziz alleged that Anita Dube, the internationally acclaimed contemporary artist, had plagiarised lines from his poem and repurposed them as her own art.
"Let’s be clear: if someone holds my poem in a placard at a protest, a rally, a people’s uprising I stand with them. But this is not that. This is my poem, written in velvet cloth, another carved in wood, hung inside a commercial white cube space, renamed, rebranded, and resold," he said.
The Quint reached out for further comment but the poet said, "I have said what he said in the post".
In a now viral post on social media on 20 April, Aziz, a Jamia Millia Islamia alumnus, wrote, “...a friend saw my words stitched into a work on display...in Delhi and immediately called me. That was the first time I learned (about it)."
Dube, 66, who is often known to use her art to question hierarchies, identities, and status quo, has been displaying her works as part of the ongoing ‘Three Storey House’ exhibition at the Vadehra Art Gallery. The collection features a mix of sculptures and mixed-media compositions, including wood carvings and kinetic installations. Some of these works, including one titled ‘Big Zebra’, another titled 'Little Zebra', and yet another named 'After Aamir Aziz', contain lines from 'Sab Yaad Rakha Jayega'.
Rendered on velvet and wood in black and white, the text is nearly illegible unless one takes a closer look. And yet, the text is there for all to see.
Following outrage over Aziz’s post, Dube has implied in a statement that her use of the poem was meant to convey her “love” for it. Aziz has nevertheless alleged that he was neither asked for consent nor informed in any way by the artist or exhibition organisers about the use of his poem for commercial purposes.
“This is not conceptual borrowing. This is theft. This is erasure,” Aziz had said.
IP Rights: Whose Art is it, Anyway?
In India, intellectual property (IP) rights are protected by the Copyright Act, 1957. The Act covers products of intellectual or creative work, including literature or literary works, artworks like paintings, designs or other forms of visual media, musical, video or audio-visual works, as well as computer generated coding, apps, machines and so on. Intellectual property disputes can be fought as civil cases (resulting in damages) or as criminal proceedings.
While some argue that changing form or adapting a property does not amount to infringement, derivative works of creation based on ideas originally expressed by another also amount to copyright infringement.
“In India, copyright laws are rather strong, given the right process is followed. However, richer or more influential parties involved in a lawsuit may get the upper hand in terms of resources,” Sharjeel Ahmad, a Delhi High Court advocate, said.
“The defence that Dube gave is not likely to stand in court, should Aziz choose to prosecute,” he added.
“There are some cases when copyright laws don’t apply; like if it’s in fair use, or not for commercial or moneymaking purposes. But as per Aziz, Dube has been making money from the artworks for some time."Sharjeel Ahmad, Lawyer
In his post, Aziz, who currently lives in Mumbai and is also a theatre artist, alleged that Dube had been using his poem “for years including in a 2023 exhibition titled Of Mimicry, Mimesis and Masquerade, curated by Arshiya Lokhandwala and then again displayed in the India Art Fair 2025.”
He alleged that when he first contacted the artist about the usage of his poem this year, she “deliberately hid” the fact that she had been using the poem for some time now.
In the wake of Aziz’s public accusations, both the gallery and Dube have said that the pieces in question have been removed from sale.
Roshini Vadehra, director of the gallery, said in a statement:
“We have been in touch with Aamir Aziz and his legal representatives for over a month. This is a situation that we have taken very seriously. We immediately ensured that the works Aamir Aziz has concerns with were not offered for sale."
The gallery did not respond to queries about how many artworks containing Aziz's poem have been sold in the past but said that discussion between Aziz and Dube are "ongoing".
Meanwhile, Dube also put out a statement, admitting to “lapses”, and adding that "the intent of quoting words from Aamir Aziz’s poem was to celebrate them.”
She also said that Aziz had initiated a “social media trial” against her, even though she was “in love” with lines from the poem and had only used them in “solidarity”, in the “spirit of the Commons and Copy Left”.
“I have quoted Martin Luther King, Bell Hooks, and others in the same spirit in this exhibition and elsewhere," she said.
The painting has not yet been removed from the exhibition.
Solidarity or Exploitation?
In the case of Aziz, however, many feel that the poet has the benefit of the doubt and that ethically, the artist is in the wrong.
“The basic idea behind consent laws is to enable one to commercially exploit one's own creation and prevent others from doing it without their consent. It's actually a stopgap concept because private property cannot cover knowledge and ideas,” Arjun Ramachandran, who researches communication theories at Hyderabad University, told The Quint.
“Aziz is a living poet. By using his words commercially without his consent, Dube has denied fair remuneration to an independent artist since there was no contract between them about what the latter would get paid".Arjun Ramachandran
Reacting to Dube’s “apology”, writer and author Arundhati Ghosh made a point about power positions.
“It is really disturbing how we cannot even say sorry properly in public. How difficult it is for us to unwear our positions of power, and step out weapon-less to just apologise," she wrote on Facebook.
Meanwhile, independent artists feel that while Aziz’s case got the deserved limelight, most of the ilk are rarely able to win such cases when a bigger or more established entity decides to plagiarise or become “inspired” from their creations.
Soham Pal, a Kolkata-based independent filmmaker and student at Satyajit Ray Film & Television Institute, said for small-scale creators and artists, copyright disputes can end up costing a bomb in resources and time.
“Laws exist, true. But for most indie artists, it is next to impossible to win against a bigger entity,” Pal told The Quint, adding, “However, big brands are very quick to sue independent artists if they even sniff out a hint of an overlap. The music industry is notorious for this".
Pal, who is studying sound engineering, feels that the existence of guilds or other professional bodies helps create a healthy system for artists.
"The Screenwriters Association in West Bengal, for instance, actively looks out for such issues and does advocacy on intellectual property rights of regional scriptwriters. They show good results in defending works from plagiarism."Soham Pal, filmmaker and student, SRFTI
Moreover, beyond legality and copyright issues, the incident also brings up a question of morality. Critics of Dube's use of the poem feel that copyright infringement or not, it definitely amounted to socio-political appropriation.
Protest poet Moumita Alam explains that "resistance" is also a capital for some. "Some creators or artists see it as a ripe market. Look at the use of the Azaadi song in Gully Boy. It basically depoliticised the slogan, put it out of context, and used it as a seemingly 'progressive' but invariably commerical song".
For minorities in this country, especially artists, the situation is much more desperate. "Resistance is not always a choice. Unfortunately, some people show solidarity only to use us or repurpose our work for their own personal benefits. They just use the vulnerability and precarity that people like Aamir, or I, have to deal with," Alam told The Quint.
Similar debates about appropriation and copyright had been raised in 2023 after the release of the OTT series 'Made in Heaven' when Dalit scholar and author Yashica Dutt accused the series' creators of using her story of "coming out" as a Dalit as the plotline for one of the episodes without crediting her. (Critics, in turn, criticised Dutt as well for erasing queer Dalit voices and appropriating their intersectional difference.)
"It's good to see that Aamir Aziz is gaining some media attention and support. But many of us who live on the margins sometimes don't find space to raise our voices against this kind of blatant, unethical copyright violation. As an individual poet, essayist and artist, it's very difficult to fight against those who are in a better power position and who have the cultural capital".Moumita Alam
The poet recalls how a prominent newspaper had once carried one of her poems without her consent, and had credited it to 'a Muslim poet'. "This is one kind of erasure too," Alam concludes.
She had not raised the matter at the time, thinking that her poem reached a mass of peolpe and the newspaper didn't earn money by selling the poem. "But in Aamir's case, it's different".
“Sab Yaad Rakha Jayega talks about injustice, inequality, and oppression by those in power. I was a Jamia student at the time it was written and had participated in the anti-CAA protests when I first heard the poem. It was a call to action. This (Dube’s adaptation) is a hollow distortion of that spirit of a nation’s collective protest,” Ahmad concluded.