T

Cases:
Green vs Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand
(1)
Anil Gupta vs Kunal Das Gupta & Ors (2)

Can a concept or an idea be copyrighted?

Aashima Rathee
Anagh Sharma
Dnyanal
Kshemkalyani
Dhivya Aasuri
Asyhwarya Sharma
Manish Pupneja
Pragya Das
Shreya Jain
Tarishi Mishra

ASE 1.

Arguments

A talent hunt television show called Opportunity Knocks which was

produced in New Zealand had copied concept and features from a
British programme which had the same name

The writer and presenter of the British show, Hughie Green claimed
that besides the format and title, BCNZ had also copied the concept
of clapometer, a device which measured applause by the viewers,
and even catchphrases like, This is your show folks.

Plaintif
He claimed breach of copyright in the title, the scripts and the
dramatic format and for passing of.

ASE 1.

Arguments
The details of the format of the show were limited to
- the winner being the act who registered the highest
audience applause on a clapometer
- a few unique catchphrases
Hughes Greens was not famous and popular (prove his
reputation) enough to claim passing of

A format is an idea and in itself an idea cannot be

Defendant protected under the copyright law

ASE 1.

Judge Ongley J

Conclusion
Passing Of
Not distinctive
to the TV
viewers in NZ
Not create
goodwill
Insufficient
proof for false
representation

Dramatic
Content
Incapable of
being
performed
Denied
status of
dramatic
work

Script
Absence of
physical
manifestatio
n of script
No firm
conclusion

Title
No
copyright in
the title of
the program

The scripts did no more than express a general

idea or concept and could not therefore be
protected by copyright.

ASE 2.

SUMMARY
Anil Gupta conceived the idea of Swayamvar, a reality television show that for match making which will be a
platform to young women to choose a spouse from a short list of potential suitors. He shared the idea as a concept
note with Kunal Das Gupta & Ors.
Kunal Das Gupta & Ors were planning to come out with a big budget reality matchmaking show using the Anil
Guptas concept of Swayamvar and Anil Gupta came to know about this through media. He consequentially
approached the court of law.
It was alleged by the plaintif that the defendant had illegally used his idea and implemented which is a breach of
his copyright. The defendant argued that it was only the expression of the idea and not the idea itself which could be
protected under the copyright. The plaintif sought injunction.

Arguments
Plaintif

Reproduction of the plaintifs idea through the format of defendants publicized show, Shubh Vivah,
is an infringement of copyright
Breach of confidence reposed by the plaintif to the defendant; confidential aspects of concept and
programme were not in public domain or common knowledge
Injunction sought to hold of pirated concept launch, till plaintif launch first ever reality show on
Doordarshan, on failing to do dso, they would rob the novelty out of the idea
Mr.Sibal has cited Talbott v. General Television Corpn. (1981) RPC 1. Quoting the Law of Trade Secrets
by Robert Dean at page 115, Mr.Sibal contended that a self-evident solution for some problem may be
novel once it is recognised. The novelty is in recognising the solution.
Mr.Sibal has contended that law of confidence deals with not only written formats, it may be
something which is given to other persons as oral communications. To buttress his arguments Mr.Sibal
has cited Copinger and Skone James on Copyright at page 721/722.
Contended that springboard doctrine will come into play as the concept of Swayamvar as a TV reality
show is the result of the work done by the plaintif as he has used his brain and thus produced a result
which can only be produced by somebody who goes through the same process.
Confidential information is going to be used in competition with the plaintif, it is not merely a matter
of compensation in terms of money.

ASE 2.

Arguments
A content note which was presented to the plaintifs was not a confidential
document as per industry norms. It is a mere draft and at no point was the
detailed concept of the programme was given to the defendants
The concept of Swayamvar was in public domain. No copyright exist in the
subject matter of mythological or historical belief
There can be no copyright of an idea, theme, subject matter and historical
facts.
When ideas are developed from common source, similarities are bound to
occur.
Where the theme is same and it is presented and treated diferently, it
becomes an independent work and no question of copyright comes into
existence
Even prior to 1996, there were several shows in existence outside India
having similar theme of matchmaking on TV. Even otherwise, the process of
selecting groom from a variety of suitors is a traditional concept, rooted in
Indian tradition, mythology and there was nothing novel or unique about it.
It was contended that defendants have made many episodes whereas the
plaintif has yet to commence making any episode and, therefore,
interlocutory injunction cannot be granted

Defendant

ASE 2.

Conclusion

The Court found that the material or information which

was scanty in the public domain was used by the plaintif
to develop and evolve a typical business strategy.
However, what made the concept confidential was the fact
that the plaintif had used his brain and thus produced a
unique result applying the concept.. The court also said
that transmitting or enabling the transmission by
television of the programme entitled Shubh Vivahmatch
making be implemented within a period of four months
from the date of the order. If the plaintifs are not in a
position to transmit on television its programme entitled
Swayamvar within a period of four months, defendants
shall be at liberty to transmit its programme Shubh Vivah
after expiry of four months. In case the plaintif launches
its programme Swayamvar within a period of four
months from the date of the order, the defendants are
further restrained from transmitting or showing or
exhibiting or televising their programme Shubh Vivah or
any other progrmme having its subject or theme of match
making for a further period of two months.

ASE
COMPARISION
Similarities

The crux of both cases was about copyright

of concepts and ideas
In both the cases there was a breach of trust.
In Case 1, Green trusted his viewers not to
copy his content while in Case 2 Anil Gupta
trusted the broadcasters.
In both the cases, the trust was violated.

Diferences

Case 1 ruled that ideas do not come under

copyright laws.
Case 2 ruled that ideas and concepts come under
copyright laws
This was because of the diferences in the copyright
laws.
In the first case, it was a foreigner fighting for the
copyrights in another country, New Zealand, while
in the second case, it was an Indian citizen fighting
in his own country.
The second ruling is a significant development from
the first one as it protects the rights of those
developing concepts and prevents broadcasters or
others to take advantage of the content developers

What does copyright protect?

Copyright protects the following types of works:
literary works, including

written works, such as letters, e-mails, journal articles, novels, screen plays, poems and song lyrics;

tables and compilations, including compilations of data and multimedia works; o computer programs;

dramatic works, including dance, mime and film scenarios or scripts;

musical works, being the music itself, separate from lyrics or sound recording;
artistic works, including paintings, drawings, diagrams, maps, engravings, etchings, photographs, sculptures and
architectural works;
sound recordings, being the recording of sounds itself, separate to the actual music or story;
films, being the moving images on a video or DVD, separate from underlying works such as scripts and music;
communication works, including radio and TV broadcasts and Internet transmissions, separate from the films, music
and other material which they contain;
typographical arrangements of published editions, being the layout of a published edition of the whole or part of a
literary, dramatic or musical work.
Copyright protects original works, whether in hard copy or electronic form.
What is not protected by copyright?
Copyright protects the expression of ideas or information not the ideas or information itself. For example, if you write a
novel, the text will be protected, but not the ideas or plot. Someone could write their own novel using your ideas, without
necessarily infringing copyright. Similarly, if two authors independently create a similar work based on the same idea,
without copying from each other or from someone else, there is no copyright infringement.
Some works do not attract copyright protection. For instance, names, titles, single words and headlines are usually too
small or unoriginal to be protected by copyright.
Source : Copyright Council of New Zealand