What if your favorite character never boarded that train or chose not to die? Imagine DDLJ with Raj watching Simran vanish into the distance, or Jab We Met if Geet stuck to schedule and never detoured into destiny. In this new world, iconic moments aren’t sacred, they’re remixable. Welcome to AI’s playground, where stories evolve, rebel, and rewrite themselves at the click of a code.
Raanjhanaa’s Alternate Ending: Art vs. Algorithm
Eros International, the official producer and primary rights holder of “Raanjhanaa,” recently sparked debate by releasing an AI-generated alternate ending for the film, allowing the protagonist to survive instead of following the original tragic arc. The move drew immediate criticism by the director Anand L. Rai calling it a betrayal of his creative vision, and Dhanush firmly objected, stating this was not the film or climax he had agreed to twelve years ago. This has clearly sparked a stir and quickly landed itself as a prime-time debate topic. At stake: who gets to rewrite the story when machines join the writers’ room?
Copyright Law: Who Holds the Pen?
Under Indian copyright law, the rights over a cinematograph film are firmly vested in the producer, in this case, Eros International. This means that unless specifically restricted by contract, production houses have broad authority to adapt, reproduce, or alter film content, including using new technologies like AI to create alternate endings or versions. It’s increasingly common for contracts to include “New Media” and “derivative works” clauses, granting producers the flexibility to explore futuristic content modifications such as AI-generated reinterpretations. But legally correct doesn’t always mean creatively respectful.
Moral Rights: Where the Soul Resides
Section 57 of the Indian Copyright Act grants authors moral rights to object to distortion or modification. These rights allow creators to claim authorship and to object to any distortion, mutilation, or other modification of their work that could harm their honor or reputation. However, there’s a catch: In the case of films, the producer is typically recognized as the “author” under the law, which means directors and other key creative contributors have limited moral rights protection unless expressly written into their contracts.
Personality Rights: The AI-Face Dilemma
Today’s battleground includes personality rights: legal protections for your voice, face, and identity. With AI generating deepfakes and digital clones, the courts are waking up but the contracts often remain silent. Courts have said artists can say no if their image or voice is used without permission in new AI-made content. However, unless actors like Dhanush have special clauses in their contracts, most studios protect themselves by having artists sign broad permissions from the start. So, while producers usually have legal backing, using an actor’s image or voice in new AI content without consent is still a tricky area that’s developing.
The Industry Divide
Thalaiva’s ex son-in-law and, of course, the OG Kolaveri Boy can negotiate protections, but newcomers often sign broad contracts allowing studios to use AI on their performances without extra consent or pay. They can’t afford to negotiate hard because what lies ahead is the twinkle of tinsel town and sheer fear of being labelled “difficult to work with”. This makes the gap in bargaining power even wider as AI grows in filmmaking.
AI and Indian Law: Uncharted Territory
Indian law hasn’t fully caught up with the rapid rise of AI-generated content. Courts and regulators generally require a meaningful level of human input for copyright to apply, but the boundaries between human creativity and machine-made output are fuzzy. This uncertainty is especially tricky when AI alters or recreates an actor’s performance or image. The legal framework still leaves many questions about ownership, rights, and consent in AI-modified works unanswered, making this an evolving and complex area for everyone involved.
The Bigger Question: Can Stories Still Be Sacred?
The Raanjhanaa affair is more than just a creative feud, it’s a glimpse into how India’s film law is scrambling to keep up with AI. As studios now have the power to rewrite endings or invent new stories with a click, creators must pay closer attention to not just the art, but also the contracts and rights that protect their intent and identity. Moral rights and personality rights matter more than ever, but their real impact will depend on what artists negotiate, how courts evolve, and the legal safeguards of the future.
Don’t be surprised if tomorrow’s films decide that Veeru never really died in “Sholay Phir Se” and maybe he finds Basanti too much of a yapper and chooses Dhanno the horse for a quieter life instead. When AI takes the director’s seat, the credits roll differently.
We the People 