The legal battle between Nayanthara and Dhanush centers around a dispute over the use of behind-the-scenes footage in a Netflix documentary about Nayanthara’s career. The controversy began when Nayanthara’s team included a clip from the making of Naanum Rowdy Dhaan, a film produced by Dhanush. Dhanush sent a legal notice demanding the removal of the footage, arguing that as the producer of the film, he held exclusive rights to all materials related to it. He claimed that the footage was used without proper authorization, and if the clip wasn’t removed, he would seek damages.
Nayanthara, in response, expressed her disappointment over the situation. She explained that she had made efforts to obtain the necessary permissions, including trying to secure a No Objection Certificate (NOC), but faced resistance in doing so. She argued that the footage was intended for a documentary celebrating her career, not for commercial exploitation, and criticized Dhanush for making the clearance process unnecessarily difficult.
Dhanush’s team, however, maintained that Nayanthara’s actions were a clear case of copyright infringement. According to their legal stance, regardless of who recorded the footage, the rights to the content lay with Dhanush as the producer. This has sparked a public debate, with supporters of both stars taking sides. While some back Nayanthara, claiming her intent was to honor her journey, others argue that Dhanush is right to defend his intellectual property rights
Who is correct? What says the Indian Copyright Act?
In the copyright dispute between Nayanthara and Dhanush, the key legal issue revolves around the ownership and authorization of behind-the-scenes footage from the film Naanum Rowdy Dhaan.
Under the Copyright Act, 1957, the producer of a film is generally granted copyright over the film’s material, which includes not only the final product but also any associated footage (such as behind-the-scenes footage). According to Section 17 of the Act, the producer of a work has the exclusive right to control the reproduction, distribution, and public performance of the work, unless otherwise agreed upon.
In this case, Dhanush, as the producer of Naanum Rowdy Dhaan, claims that the footage used by Nayanthara was his intellectual property. He argues that permission from him, as the producer, was required for its use in the documentary. Since Nayanthara did not obtain his consent, his legal team asserts that the documentary violated his copyright. This aligns with the legal interpretation of producer rights in Section 17, which gives producers control over such materials
On the other hand, Nayanthara contends that her intent was not to commercialize the footage, but to showcase her journey in the film industry through a documentary. She further states that her team had made several efforts to secure the necessary clearances, including seeking a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from Dhanush’s production team
This suggests that Nayanthara was attempting to comply with the requirements under Section 30 (which covers the necessity of obtaining permission for reproduction), but faced resistance in the process.
Ultimately, based on the Copyright Act, Dhanush holds a stronger position. The footage, as part of the film’s production, belongs to him as the producer, and without a clear authorization or agreement, Nayanthara may have infringed upon his copyright by using it in her documentary. The Indian Copyright Act, 1957 places significant weight on the rights of the producer over the materials associated with their work, unless specific agreements state otherwise
Thus, legally, Dhanush appears to be in the right, but Nayanthara’s argument of intent and attempts at securing clearance complicates the matter, suggesting that a more amicable resolution might have been possible.