http://thehoot.org/story.asp?storyid=Web591763455Hoot10200%20PM2593&pn=1#

6/14/2007

Urmi Juvekar Vs CNN IBN

A reconstruction from available accounts of how a film maker fought and
won a copyright case against a leading TV channel

On 9th November 2005, documentary film maker and scriptwriter Urmi
Juvekar registered a concept for a reality television show called 'Work
in Progress' with the Film Writers' Association.

The concept was simple: three citizens or citizen's groups at three
locations across the country take up a troublesome civic issue and try
to solve it on a campaign footing within a month. Reporters and cameras
from a channel follow the story as it unfolds. Every night on the news
bulletins of the channel a 3-minute capsule keeps us updated on the
developments at each location. At the end of the first three weeks we
see a 60 minute episode of the week's developments with a forward look
to the upcoming week. A concluding 60 minute finale comes at end of the
month.


This was a project that would draw public attention to all the good work
of activists under the Right to Information Act. A tremendous idea for
civic education and involvement, the immediate daily TV coverage during
the course of the campaign would have had implications for the progress
of the cases followed. Such an idea for a reality-based programme could
only have been realised with the resources which a TV news channel, with
its network of people all over the country, can provide.


Here is how the story unfolded:


10th March 2006, Urmi wrote to Rasika Tyagi from CNN IBN after a
telephonic conversation and e-mailed her the concept note.


21st March 2006, Rasika Tyagi wrote back saying that she found the
concept note interesting and asked for a meeting.


3rd April 2006, a meeting is held in the CNN IBN office in Delhi. A
detailed concept note with treatment, sample characters and episode
development is presented along with the budget and production plan. The
budget is deemed to be high and CNN IBN offers some in-house facilities
to bring costs down.


They also suggest an option of doing it in two languages so that it can
be broadcast on IBN 7 simultaneously.


Several more discussions are held in subsequent months and finally Urmi
is informed that the project will be considered after World Cup 2007.


14th May 2007, CNN IBN puts on a new show 'Summer Showdown'. It is a
daily   3-minute capsule, but has no the-end-of-the-week review. Their
website ibnlive.com advertises it as a reality show showcasing five
families across five metros solving their civic problems in 4 weeks.


19th May 2007, Urmi is informed by friends that a show that looks very
similar to her 'Work in Progress' is on air and she manages to see the
show.


21st May 2007, Urmi rushes to the Bombay High Court. The case is
scheduled for 23rd May in front of the vacation judge. She claims
infringement of copyright and breach of confidentiality.


23rd May 2007, counsel for CNN IBN makes a statement in court that
'Summer Showdown' is not a reality show but a live news clipping. The
court asks them to give an affidavit stating the same.


24th May 2007, CNN IBN asks the judge to change the order. Now they
admit that Summer Showdown' is a reality-based programme but insist that
it is not based on 'Work in Progress'. They claim that their previous
day's statement in the court was misunderstood. Their appeal is rejected
and they are asked to file an affidavit on the 31st stating that 'Summer
Showdown' is a live news clipping and not based on Urmi's project.


29th May 2007, CNN IBN files an affidavit only stating that they have
not copied Urmi's idea. They also state that ideas are not protected by
copyright. The affidavit is filled with contradictory statements.
'Summer Showdown' now becomes a race between various civic authorities
in completing summer-related problems in four weeks. Traffic, monsoon
and garbage are portrayed as summer problems. In a play of semantics,
the civic problems dealt in 'Summer Showdown' become macro level while
the problems suggested  for 'Work in Progress' problems are stated to be
local and at micro level.


At the same time the CNN IBN website continues to feature 'Summer
Showdown' as a tale of five families across the country trying to solve
civic problems.


Urmi's sample episodes demonstrating the concept are dismissed as
fiction scripts. According to CNN IBN, her 25 page project proposal is a
mere idea. Well known anchor Rajdeep Sardesai denies knowledge of the
matter while his e-mail replies to Urmi state otherwise.


4th June 2007, Urmi sends a rejoinder, exposing the contradictions in
the affidavit, and pointing to the fact that although in the court
'Summer Showdown' was described as a live news clipping, it has now
become a reality show created in-house during March and April 2007.


6th May 2007, the case comes for hearing in Bombay High Court. The
counsel for CNN IBN pleads for more time since he has not been able to
prepare adequately. Urmi's counsel opposes the move as only 4 days
remain for the first round of 4 weeks of the telecast. The judge agrees
to listen to the case on merit.


The case is heard for four hours. Urmi's counsel puts all facts
regarding meetings and submissions on the table and deals with
similarities at great length. The counsel for CNN IBN sticks to the
single point that ideas are not protected by copyright and Urmi's idea
is just a rehash of 'Rajni', the popular programme of the 1980s, and
several present day citizen journalism programmes on TV.


Urmi's counsel refutes these arguments, concluding his statement by
saying that if she does not get a stay order in this matter, then no
creative person who approaches a TV channel in order to realise his or
her idea will feel safe and protected by the law. The judgment is
scheduled for the next day.


7th June 2007, the judge dictates the judgment in his chamber for three
hours. He comes to the court and grants the stay order to Urmi Juvekar
on the basis of copyright claims and breach of confidentiality. CNN IBN
demands a relief of four days. The judge reminds them that their
programme cycle gets over on Saturday 9th June in any case, so relief
till Monday 11th June seems pointless.


8th June 2007, CNN IBN rushes into appeal but the division bench asks
for a copy of the judgment. That still being in preparation, they have
to stop there. On Monday 11th June, CNN IBN is expected make an appeal
to the bench and we will see how the story spins on.


14 June 2007, The Hoot tried to locate some item related to "Summer
Showdown" on CNN-IBN's website. The links that were there are now
missing.


In the meanwhile, considering the landmark nature of the judgement and
the significance of it for independent film makers, script-writers and
the Film Writers' Association, there is not much news of it about,except
for the links below.


The simple reason: media refuses to touch the story. In that lies
another story, something of a warning to those who have to survive in
India Inc.


Relevant links:



DNA story, Reality "Unplugged"

http://70.87.69.50/DNA/artMailDisp.aspx?article=08_06_2007_003_007&typ=1&pub=577

"CNN-IBN hit with copyright case; court stays show" on
Indiantelevision.com
www.indiantelevision.com/headlines/y2k7/june/june140.php .

Reply via email to