International Law

Experts, Artists and Idiots

By Apar Gupta

There is rarely been a movie in which Aamir acted which I did not enjoy. His acting, performances and selection of collaborating film artists has been consistently excellent. However, even I know (not bieng the stardust reading type) that Aamir enjoys a bit of a reputation of a gadfly venturing into the artistic autonomy of his collaborators. An extension of this tendency was recently exposed in a public spat over amendments mooted to the Copyright Act with Javed Akhtar, the acclaimed Indian lyricist.

What worried me after reading the posts was that both Aamir and Mr. Javed Akhtar were advancing thier respective professional interests through copyright law. There is nothing wrong in this. It is natural for a person who loves his profession and who has attained success in it to think it as more than a cog in the social wheel. However, what is wrong and worrying is the formation and the composition of the panel.

There are no official press releases, public statements and invitations pursuant to which the panel was set up. One learns of the panel only through this high profile spat. Moreover, the news reports term the panel as an informal committee. This appears to be quite disconcerting in the view that the committee has been formed by the Human Resources Ministry which has the power and the authority to suggest amendments to the Copyright act.

Coming to the specific composition of the Committee (revealed by news reports). It consists of Javed Akhtar (Lyrcist), Vishal Bharadwaj (Producer/Writer/Director), Vishal Dadlani (Rocker/Composer), Prasoon Joshi (Writer/Actor/Director), Anjum Rajabali, Saket Chaudhury (script writer), and Ram Sampat (composer, producer and musician). All of these panel members are excellent industry representatives; however a draft which is based entirely on thier inputs will in my opinion not have a sufficient plurality of opinion. Firstly what about other artists. A makeup artist will be making important and creative decisions in a fantasy movie, similarly a costume designer will be doing the same for a period drama. Secondly, all of these members are successful and have managed to rise and prosper inspite of the frailties of copyright law. Hence the experience that they profess to have about the inequities of copyrght law is based on secondary experiences. In such a situation it will be desirable not only to have these artists but also experts who draft copyright clauses as well as members from an academic environment. Finally I would tersely suggest that at the end of the day the royalty sum which will be given to any contributor/author (public draft or minutes unavailable hence I cannot precisely state how this will be worked out) will be borne by the public. Why not have a public consultation, the consumers are the ultimate stakeholders!

I am not opposed to Artists being part of the amendment process; on the contrary I support it. As Frank Zappa has taught us in the congressial hearings on obscenity in music (“or free speech”) artists are connected to the art, they understand how it operates and how it is difficult to capture its details. However, at the same time, I believe that room should be made for all stakeholders. Experts, Artists and Idiots (a reference to the vimhans BT-brinjal protester).

Full post as published by India Law & Tech on February 19, 2010 (boomark / email).