The Artiste and Plagiarism
One often hears artistes ruing that their work was unceremoniously copied and sometimes promoted on such a large scale that the original piece of work not only received zero recognition but was also trashed as a mimic! The world of Indian classical arts with respect to plagiarism and copyrights (if ever in existence) is a blurry one. To attain clarity of vision in the current scenario seems a distant dream even as I prod individuals, dance companies and Gurus to help clear the haze.
Let us begin by acknowledging that traditionally, Indian classical arts, especially dance has been alien to the world of ownership rights. Be it poetry, music or choreography, the inherent nature of the art form has always allowed a multitude of people to enjoy a creation. Within the field of classical music, many composers introduced tell tale signatures within their compositions as a way to safeguard their creation from being claimed by others. This was probably how far the idea of ownership went. Beyond this, the aspect of legality was non-existent, until recent years.
With dance, the concept of ownership itself is much more complicated. Who owns the choreography? Probably the choreographer. But when the grammar of classical dance is for everyone to own, can a combination of steps be patented by any individual? Or is it the idea behind the choreography that one owns?
Who owns the music? While the likes of the Tanjore Quartet or Kshetrayya are not around to claim ownership or royalty, what about music that has been specially created? Who owns it: The producer who financially funds it or the music composer or the entire team of musicians who brainstorm and create?
Do dancers patent their costume designs? Who owns the production if there are multiple choreographers?
For a person of a philosophical disposition, these questions get brushed off as superficial: 'Any imitation or plagiarism will ultimately meet its own fate or karma. Each artiste should only be concerned with creation and not bother beyond that.' But this is a statement that works in an ideal environment. In the real world of arts, where financial investment in creation of a production is overwhelming to say the least, safeguarding one's work becomes important. At the same time, it can never be a good idea to become obsessed with copyrights and patents to the extent of filing patents for every sequence of adavus choreographed or for every story adaptation. To know what is adequate versus what it is to go overboard comes with awareness.
The world of filing or holding patents for creative work is still untouched by many. Most senior Gurus find the world of patenting and copyrighting unnecessary. "It is a better idea to instill values and morals in young students rather than create an industry out of patents and copyrights", avers Guru Smt. Sheela Chandrasekhar. "That is how we were raised as artistes- to give due credit to the artiste who has created extraordinary work. Building an environment of trust is more important than pondering over legal battles. If one is inspired by a youtube video, why not write to the creator, ask for permission and acknowledge them at the performance. On the other hand, patenting and copyrighting our work does not guarantee that it will not be copied. In today's global village, how far can one go to insulate your work? With music, maybe the inclusion of signatures can help provide clarity to future generations on who the composer was. With dance, since it is dependent on music, signatures are difficult. So it brings us back to the need to instill the right values in every dancer." She closes with a remark that sets off another train of thought, "And how do you demarcate creativity? Is it possible to draw a line and say 'I have created this'?" The inherent fluidic nature of classical dance and its grammar is such that it becomes increasingly difficult to contain it within objective boundaries. And this is a double edged sword; the entire world of creation remains open to all because artistes cannot cordon off portions of dance saying it is of their making, BUT, it then also makes it very difficult to prove that your work has been copied by another in a court of law!
With increasing amounts of financial and logistical investment in creative work in recent years, legal tussles are not uncommon. Threats to file lawsuits have been placed when pre-recorded music is used by dancers on stage. Some may question the purpose of putting pre-recorded music on the shelf if one does not want a performer to use it! But the recording companies who hold the rights to the music insist that these tracks are only for personal use and not for performance. There have been insinuations of music being ripped off Youtube videos. One must therefore be doubly sure of what is put up online in order to protect their own music. Legal protection in such cases may not be the most appropriate steps to take. There have been instances of entire items being paraded as one's own when in fact it was choreographed by another. This drives us back to the point of the need for legal protection and ethical behavior.
I ask two popular Bangalore based dance companies on how they deal with plagiarism, the idea of patents, contracts and more.
Madhu Natraj created Karnataka's first contemporary dance company in 1995. As the head of Natya STEM dance Kampni, she looks back at a journey that has had its share of bitter experiences. "In my 27 year dance career, I have encountered several breaches of copyright and intellectual property violations. It can take up to 12 years to fight a case! As a creative individual can I afford to take that kind of time away from my art and engage in negativity? I choose not to. Instead my motto has been to constantly 're-invent' and keep creating newer dimensions in the dance realm."
There have been instances in the past when dancers misused their liberty and pulled fast ones on the producer or choreographer. And so in order to leave no place for complacency, contracts with stringent protocols began to be drawn up. Are these bitter experiences few and far between? Are these commonplace within the context of Indian dance companies? Does teh written contract become a pre-requisite? "We do not draw any contract as our work philosophy is based on trust and positive rapport. My mother did have some errant dancers who misused her generosity but we have let it pass as it is they who eventually dealt with the consequence of betrayal." says Madhu. Parshwanath Upadhye, who heads the Punyah Dance Company adds, "I have never tried to safeguard my creative work amongst the principle dancers as they equally contribute for the production. But when I hire dancers neither have I ever made a written contract. I have always believed that classical dancers of that standard and professional background do know the importance of music and choreography. But if they are inspired by the similar idea and try something on their own then it has always made me happy."
Who holds the rights to the music, choreography and production then within the company? "As the producer I 'assume' I hold the rights to the music. Nevertheless the concept of having absolute rights on all these is something alien to classical dancers. And hence informally all the principle dancers of the company have the equal right on the music as well as the choreography." says Parshwanath.
Subjectivity of art is often cited as an excuse for plagiarism. How can artistes protect themselves? "Plagiarism is the best form of flattery' I have been told several times when our choreography, costume ideas and even publicity design were appropriated. I have become philosophical about some of these trespasses and take solace in the fact that a certain 'Universal justice' does exist that transcends our knowledge of reality." says Madhu. "There is a very thin line between being inspired and copying a work. If the ideas and presentation inspires you then it's an amazing phenomenon for the art world. For example Dr.Padma Subramanyam has inspired thousands to use Karanas, while it's difficult to call it as plagiarism if someone uses Karanas in their presentation. Hence the presentation and thought process can be inspired and not copied. But using someone's idea completely amounts to plagiarism. For example the way a traditional artist shows a story might differ completely from a creative artist showing the same.
In the world of creativity, every artiste must be wary of where they spend their time and energy. Legal battles, copyright laws and the kinds would only drain the artiste and so we assume that it would be wise to carry on with work and turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the negative end of the spectrum. But in doing so, we risk creative work being taken for granted and no proper credits being given to the creative mind. The debate will continue...
Published in Ananya Kalasinchana May 2017
Do not replicate or copy any part of the article without permission from the print publisher.
Let us begin by acknowledging that traditionally, Indian classical arts, especially dance has been alien to the world of ownership rights. Be it poetry, music or choreography, the inherent nature of the art form has always allowed a multitude of people to enjoy a creation. Within the field of classical music, many composers introduced tell tale signatures within their compositions as a way to safeguard their creation from being claimed by others. This was probably how far the idea of ownership went. Beyond this, the aspect of legality was non-existent, until recent years.
With dance, the concept of ownership itself is much more complicated. Who owns the choreography? Probably the choreographer. But when the grammar of classical dance is for everyone to own, can a combination of steps be patented by any individual? Or is it the idea behind the choreography that one owns?
Who owns the music? While the likes of the Tanjore Quartet or Kshetrayya are not around to claim ownership or royalty, what about music that has been specially created? Who owns it: The producer who financially funds it or the music composer or the entire team of musicians who brainstorm and create?
Do dancers patent their costume designs? Who owns the production if there are multiple choreographers?
For a person of a philosophical disposition, these questions get brushed off as superficial: 'Any imitation or plagiarism will ultimately meet its own fate or karma. Each artiste should only be concerned with creation and not bother beyond that.' But this is a statement that works in an ideal environment. In the real world of arts, where financial investment in creation of a production is overwhelming to say the least, safeguarding one's work becomes important. At the same time, it can never be a good idea to become obsessed with copyrights and patents to the extent of filing patents for every sequence of adavus choreographed or for every story adaptation. To know what is adequate versus what it is to go overboard comes with awareness.
The world of filing or holding patents for creative work is still untouched by many. Most senior Gurus find the world of patenting and copyrighting unnecessary. "It is a better idea to instill values and morals in young students rather than create an industry out of patents and copyrights", avers Guru Smt. Sheela Chandrasekhar. "That is how we were raised as artistes- to give due credit to the artiste who has created extraordinary work. Building an environment of trust is more important than pondering over legal battles. If one is inspired by a youtube video, why not write to the creator, ask for permission and acknowledge them at the performance. On the other hand, patenting and copyrighting our work does not guarantee that it will not be copied. In today's global village, how far can one go to insulate your work? With music, maybe the inclusion of signatures can help provide clarity to future generations on who the composer was. With dance, since it is dependent on music, signatures are difficult. So it brings us back to the need to instill the right values in every dancer." She closes with a remark that sets off another train of thought, "And how do you demarcate creativity? Is it possible to draw a line and say 'I have created this'?" The inherent fluidic nature of classical dance and its grammar is such that it becomes increasingly difficult to contain it within objective boundaries. And this is a double edged sword; the entire world of creation remains open to all because artistes cannot cordon off portions of dance saying it is of their making, BUT, it then also makes it very difficult to prove that your work has been copied by another in a court of law!
With increasing amounts of financial and logistical investment in creative work in recent years, legal tussles are not uncommon. Threats to file lawsuits have been placed when pre-recorded music is used by dancers on stage. Some may question the purpose of putting pre-recorded music on the shelf if one does not want a performer to use it! But the recording companies who hold the rights to the music insist that these tracks are only for personal use and not for performance. There have been insinuations of music being ripped off Youtube videos. One must therefore be doubly sure of what is put up online in order to protect their own music. Legal protection in such cases may not be the most appropriate steps to take. There have been instances of entire items being paraded as one's own when in fact it was choreographed by another. This drives us back to the point of the need for legal protection and ethical behavior.
I ask two popular Bangalore based dance companies on how they deal with plagiarism, the idea of patents, contracts and more.
Madhu Natraj created Karnataka's first contemporary dance company in 1995. As the head of Natya STEM dance Kampni, she looks back at a journey that has had its share of bitter experiences. "In my 27 year dance career, I have encountered several breaches of copyright and intellectual property violations. It can take up to 12 years to fight a case! As a creative individual can I afford to take that kind of time away from my art and engage in negativity? I choose not to. Instead my motto has been to constantly 're-invent' and keep creating newer dimensions in the dance realm."
There have been instances in the past when dancers misused their liberty and pulled fast ones on the producer or choreographer. And so in order to leave no place for complacency, contracts with stringent protocols began to be drawn up. Are these bitter experiences few and far between? Are these commonplace within the context of Indian dance companies? Does teh written contract become a pre-requisite? "We do not draw any contract as our work philosophy is based on trust and positive rapport. My mother did have some errant dancers who misused her generosity but we have let it pass as it is they who eventually dealt with the consequence of betrayal." says Madhu. Parshwanath Upadhye, who heads the Punyah Dance Company adds, "I have never tried to safeguard my creative work amongst the principle dancers as they equally contribute for the production. But when I hire dancers neither have I ever made a written contract. I have always believed that classical dancers of that standard and professional background do know the importance of music and choreography. But if they are inspired by the similar idea and try something on their own then it has always made me happy."
Who holds the rights to the music, choreography and production then within the company? "As the producer I 'assume' I hold the rights to the music. Nevertheless the concept of having absolute rights on all these is something alien to classical dancers. And hence informally all the principle dancers of the company have the equal right on the music as well as the choreography." says Parshwanath.
If an artist were to show Sita marrying Rama literally and someone else does the same, it is tradition but if a creative artist were to show the marriage symbolically by portraying how the bow breaks, and if this idea were to be stolen, it's plagiarism. Unfortunately we can't safeguard these and just hope that people are inspired by the thought process rather than copying the content." signs off Parshwanath.
In the world of creativity, every artiste must be wary of where they spend their time and energy. Legal battles, copyright laws and the kinds would only drain the artiste and so we assume that it would be wise to carry on with work and turn a blind eye and deaf ear to the negative end of the spectrum. But in doing so, we risk creative work being taken for granted and no proper credits being given to the creative mind. The debate will continue...
Published in Ananya Kalasinchana May 2017
Do not replicate or copy any part of the article without permission from the print publisher.
Comments
Post a Comment