Artificial Intelligence (AI) is changing the way movies are made and consumed — from scriptwriting to editing and even creating new endings. But when does this technological magic cross the line? The recent uproar over the Bollywood film Raanjhanaa’s re-release with an AI-generated happy ending has brought this question into sharp focus.
The film’s director, Aanand L. Rai, called this AI-created ending an “imprudent appropriation” of his work and is thinking of taking legal action. This situation isn’t just about one movie; it’s about bigger issues — copyright, creative rights, and the ethics of using AI in art.
Let’s break down what this means, especially under Indian law.
What Happened with Raanjhanaa?
Originally, Raanjhanaa had a bittersweet, tragic ending that fit the film’s emotional tone. But the AI-generated version gave it a happy ending, which was quickly criticized by the director and fans alike. The question is: Did the company or platform that released this AI-edited version have the right to do so?
Copyright Law and AI: Who Owns What?
Indian copyright law, under the Copyright Act, 1957, protects original works like films. The creators — directors, writers, producers — have exclusive rights to reproduce, adapt, or modify their work.
An AI-generated change to a movie’s ending falls under the category of a “derivative work.” According to Section 14 of the Copyright Act, creating a derivative work without permission amounts to copyright infringement.
In the Raanjhanaa case, since the AI ending was created without the director’s or producers’ consent, it likely violates their copyright.
What About Moral Rights?
India recognizes moral rights under Section 57 of the Copyright Act, which protect the personal rights of creators even after transferring economic rights. These rights allow creators to object to any distortion or modification of their work that might harm their reputation or the integrity of the work.
The Supreme Court, in the landmark case Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia (2010), upheld moral rights strongly, emphasizing the creator’s right to protect the honor and integrity of their work.
Changing Raanjhanaa’s ending without permission clearly infringes on the director’s moral rights, since it alters the original artistic message and could harm the director’s reputation.
Indian Judgments That Matter
- Eastern Book Company & Ors vs. D.B. Modak & Anr (2008) — The Supreme Court recognized the importance of copyright in creative works and upheld strong protections against unauthorized reproductions.
- Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia (2010) — Affirmed the importance of moral rights, even when economic rights have been assigned or licensed.
- Though there are no landmark Indian cases yet directly about AI in cinema, these precedents give a solid basis to argue against unauthorized AI modifications.
Ethical Issues Around AI in Films
Apart from the legal side, there’s an ethical debate here too:
- Should AI tools be allowed to rewrite films or stories without consulting the original creators?
- Does AI undermine the director’s or writer’s creative vision?
- Should audiences be clearly told when AI has altered a film?
Ethics matter because movies are not just products; they’re expressions of art and culture.
What Does This Mean for the Future of AI and Cinema in India?
The Raanjhanaa episode is a wake-up call. As AI tools get smarter, Indian law will need to catch up, possibly by:
- Clarifying how copyright applies to AI-generated or AI-modified works.
- Strengthening moral rights to protect creators from AI misuse.
- Creating industry guidelines for ethical AI use.
- Ensuring transparency when AI edits or creates content.
In Conclusion
AI has amazing potential to help tell stories in new ways. But it should not come at the cost of disrespecting the creators behind those stories. Indian copyright law and moral rights give filmmakers tools to protect their work, and the Raanjhanaa case is a perfect example of why these protections are vital.
Going forward, filmmakers, tech companies, and lawmakers must work together to ensure AI enhances cinema without trampling on creativity or legal rights.
