Last Updated:
Sayani Gupta’s Aasmani cleared of copyright infringement by Screenwriters Association’s DSC. Complaint by Vinia Negi alleged similarities to her documentary Prabha.
Sayani Gupta’s Aasmani Cleared In Copyright Dispute After DSC Finds Only Underlying Idea Similar
Sayani Gupta’s first outing as a director has had quite a journey even before reaching audiences. What began as the release of her short-fiction comedy Aasmani soon turned into a copyright dispute. The film even lost its spot at a New Zealand film festival amid the controversy. Now, the matter has taken another turn.
The Screenwriters Association’s (SWA) Dispute Settlement Committee (DSC) has concluded proceedings related to the copyright complaint against Gupta and editor Paramita Ghosh. The development comes months after filmmaker Vinia Negi alleged that Aasmani was similar to her unfinished documentary Prabha and accused Gupta of copyright infringement and breach of trust.
According to the DSC’s statement released on Sunday, the committee reviewed submissions from both sides as well as independent expert comparisons of the two works. It concluded that the projects shared an underlying idea, but differed in their storytelling, character development, conflict and story arc.
The committee also highlighted an important distinction in copyright law — copyright protects the expression of an idea and not the idea itself. This was particularly relevant in the complaint as Prabha is a documentary based on the publicly known life of a real person.
The controversy first surfaced after the Indian Film Festival of New Zealand (TIFFNZ) withdrew its invitation to screen Aasmani, citing copyright claims. Gupta had maintained that her film was an original work and had disputed the allegations.
Gupta had earlier explained why she chose not to publicly engage with the controversy. In an interview with Hollywood Reporter India, she said she deliberately stayed away from discussions around the allegations because the matter was already before the appropriate authority. She stressed that her silence should not be interpreted as an acceptance of the claims, saying she would rather allow the legal process and facts to speak for themselves instead of addressing the issue through WhatsApp groups, private messages or social media.
The actor-director also said the complaint had been filed by another FTII filmmaker in connection with an unfinished documentary that she claimed she had no knowledge of. While acknowledging Negi’s right to raise concerns, Gupta stood by her version of events and questioned the basis of the allegations, particularly since, according to her, Negi had not watched Aasmani.
“There is a difference between an allegation and a finding. Aasmani came from its own world, its own journey. And without any knowledge of any other film in development. To see that distinction collapse into a public narrative of ‘copyright infringement’ is not only misleading, it is deeply unfair to the film and to everyone who has tirelessly worked on it. What has been troubling to watch is this become a copyright issue when it absolutely isn’t one.”
Gupta had further maintained that the script for Aasmani had taken several years to develop and was shaped through her own writing and creative process. She also pointed out that similarities in broad themes or elements do not automatically mean one work has been copied from another. According to her, elements such as an elderly woman, a vintage car, ageing or independence can appear in different stories without establishing copyright infringement.
Meanwhile, the DSC also took note of a separate defamation suit filed by Gupta against Negi. The court has reportedly ruled in Gupta’s favour in that matter. Since certain issues overlap with the SWA complaint and the defamation case is now sub judice, the DSC said it could not continue with further adjudication. The proceedings have therefore been concluded and the complaint closed at the SWA’s end, without prejudice to the legal rights and remedies available to either side.
Reacting to the development, Gupta said she was relieved that the process had reached this point and reiterated her faith in the truth.
“As I had said earlier, truth will always prevail. I had respected the process and am grateful that the truth has come out. It always does. This has been the most harrowing experience of my life. But as my grandmother would often quote Tagore and say: ‘Tomar potaka jaare dao, bohibare dao shokoti’ (whoever you give your flag to bear, you also give them the strength to bear it).”
The dispute had also spilled into Gupta’s professional life. According to a report by Bollywood Hungama, her plea stated that Negi approached the Screenwriters Association with the complaint in April 2026. Gupta alleged that while the proceedings were underway, Negi circulated a “Statement of Support” through WhatsApp and social media seeking backing from members of the film industry. The campaign, as mentioned in Gupta’s suit, received more than 250 signatures.
Gupta also claimed that the controversy caused professional losses, including the withdrawal of Aasmani from TIFFNZ. She has now sought ₹9 crore in damages and has demanded an unconditional apology and public retraction from Negi.
For Gupta, Aasmani marks an important new chapter after years as an actor. She made her feature film debut with Second Marriage Dot Com in 2012 and went on to appear in films including Fan, Jolly LLB 2 and Article 15. She also earned praise for playing Khanum, a blind Pakistani-Bangladeshi lesbian activist, opposite Kalki Koechlin in Margarita with a Straw.
Quick Answers
Ask News18The Screenwriters Association’s Dispute Settlement Committee concluded that while Aasmani and the documentary Prabha shared an underlying idea, they differed in storytelling, character development, conflict, and story arc. It noted that copyright protects the expression of an idea, not the idea itself. Additionally, because a separate defamation suit filed by Gupta against Vinia Negi was ruled in Gupta’s favor and is now sub judice, the committee concluded its proceedings and closed the complaint without prejudice.
Ask News18September 14, 2026, 09:57 IST