Two Krazzy 4 songs plagiarised: Bombay HC
Published on Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 12:38, Updated on Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 21:14 in Entertainment section
Tags: Krazzy 4, Rakesh Roshan , Mumbai
![]() |


Related Stories
Federer wins record 15th Grand Slam title
Pranab has promises to keep in Budget of hope 
Budget: How policies impact your life | Secrecy Cordon around the Budget
5 feared dead in Madhya Pradesh factory explosions
Youth shot dead by cops had 26 injury marks 
Varun fears threat to life; Maneka slams Govt
CPI-M Central Committee to act to curb Kerala infights
Recruiter of child suicide bombers held in Afghan
Kargil victory was certain: ex-army chief | Pay Tribute 
Scrap EVMs, let's go back to ballot, says Advani 
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court ruled on Thursday that two songs in forthcoming Hindi film Krazzy4 are a copy of earlier compositions by jingle composer Ram Sampath and restrained producer Rakesh Roshan from releasing the movie with the songs.
Ad jingle composer Ram Sampath had sued the makers of Krazzy 4 asking for Rs 2 crore as damages for copying his tune to compose four tracks from the film.
Justice D G Karnik listened to who listened to both Sampath's work for a Sony Ericsson cell phone advertisement, and the two songs composed by Rajesh Roshan for the film, ruled, "To my untrained ear, the music in the two works appeared to be similar."
And its not just the music the film is also said to be a straight copy of the Hollywood flick The Dream Team.
"The movie can be released without the songs in question", Justice D G Karnik added.
The film will be released as per schedule, but without the title track.
The court also stopped the sale of film's audio CDs and cassettes containing the two songs Krazzy4 and Break-free as well as the ring tones based on these songs.
The court also observed that Roshans lacked the bonafides, as they changed their earlier stand which was revealed by an SMS sent to Sampath by Hrithik Roshan saying that Sony Ericsson had given them the NOC for use of Sampath's tunes in the film.
But when matter the reached the court, they gave up this stand, and denied that there was any infringement of copyright, Justice Karnik noted. The judge held that though the advertisement jingle was only for a few seconds, it was the "catch phrase or hook phrase" that was repeated in the songs.
[ Single Page View ]
| Ads by Google |
| Related Ads: | |
















Read Comment | Post Comment
Read more comment »