Why promote a song in a trailer, edit it in a movie, asks SC of Yash Raj Films | Latest India News


NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday suspended a consumer court order directing film production company Yash Raj Films to pay ??15,000 to a teacher in Maharashtra who felt cheated because a song, “Jabra Fan”, used to promote Shah Rukh Khan’s film “Fan” in the trailer, was removed from the film.

The two-judge bench of Judges Hemant Gupta and V Ramasubramanian, however, questioned the production house for marketing the film with the song that was excluded from the film.

“The problem is you (the production company) are showing something else in the trailer that isn’t there in the movie. When the trailer comes out, it’s a trailer for the movie. Why were you marketing your film with the song when you knew it was intended to promote the film? ”The judiciary asked when hearing a call from the production house.

Afreen Fatima Zaidi, a teacher in Aurangabad, Maharashtra, complained in 2016 that she went to watch the film with her family after seeing the song “Jabra Fan” and that she felt cheated and cheated when she did. did not find the song in the movie.

The district consumer recourse forum dismissed her complaint. But she filed an appeal and convinced the state’s consumer disputes recovery commission. In 2017, the state commission ordered Yash Raj Films to pay ??10,000 in compensation and ??5,000 as litigation costs. The production house challenged the decision with the National Appeals Commission for Consumer Disputes.

On February 18, 2020, the national commission confirmed the findings of the state commission and concluded that there were reasons for Zaidi to feel cheated and the decision not to use the song featured in the trailer. of the film amounted to an “unfair commercial practice”.

In its appeal to the Supreme Court, Yash Raj Films, represented by Naomi Chandra, said it was common in the industry to use songs in the trailer that did not necessarily appear in the film. “The National Consumer Court order must be stayed as it has far-reaching consequences for the entire film industry,” Chandra said.

The judges responded by saying, “If there is a common practice in the industry, it does not mean that the practice should continue.”

The court said the question to be decided is whether the producer of a film can be considered a service provider since the movie ticket is a contract between the person who buys it and the owner of the movie theater. which exhibits the film.

“You have to give a plausible explanation,” added the bench, as he also sent a notice to the teacher.

In its 2020 verdict, the national commission held that it was not necessary that the consideration for the purchase of goods or the rental or provision of services necessarily be paid directly to the person selling the goods or provides services to the consumer. “The consideration can also go to the seller of the good or to the service provider as the case may be, can go through an intermediary”, said the commission, stressing that the price of the ticket received by the operator, a cinema, was shared between the operator, the distributor and the producer of the film. “Therefore, it cannot be admitted that the complainant was not a consumer of the petitioner,” the national commission said in its order.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.