ASSIGNMENT 7: Negotiation Case Study
Negotiation Case Study
Genuine or copied art?
Vignesh Gunjal is a 27-year-old contemporary dancer who choreographs most of his performances on stage. The community of contemporary dancers in India is quite small when compared to other popular dance forms. Many people do not even know such a dance form exists and Vignesh’s goal is to change the stereotypes surrounding such quaint and not-so-popular dance forms. Although he started his career with a group of college graduates in the year 2016, he usually performs solo in cities across India.
His solo performance, “My Sacred Unrequited Love” was dedicated to his childhood love despite being forsaken by her. Vignesh considers this piece his masterpiece as he wholly expressed himself abandoning no trace of his emotions. The performance was widely acclaimed in contemporary dance and other communities and he was also made to perform in the Global Dance Festival that was held in Rio De Janeiro in 2020.
The problem arose when Vignesh spotted his solo choreography being used by another dance artist, Vinita Shyam in her YouTube channel named ‘Viniart’ and in her documentary about different dance forms in India. She has neither credited Vignesh nor mentioned that her dance steps were inspired by his choreography. Vignesh felt exploited and immediately confronted her on Instagram by explaining to her how important his performance is and how he was extremely disappointed as an artist to see his work being stolen from him without his consent.
Vinita is a 24-year-old dance artist who pursued her major in performing arts and continued to do her master's in Ballet along with other dance forms in the USA. She has an impressive audience on her Youtube channel of up to 7 million followers and her content is well-known for being creative, original, artistic, and extravagant. She claims that her Youtube video and documentary don’t include any of Vignesh’s work and as a member of the dance community she wouldn’t do the dishonor of disrespecting another artist’s work in any way. When Vignesh coursed her even after she denied copying his work, Vinita felt that she had no choice but to block and ghost him after having attempted to explain her stance multiple times. Vignesh later approached a lawyer and decided to sue Vinita for copyright, as he wanted to ensure what he considered his masterpiece among all his other works received justice. When Vinita was alerted of this notice, she was enraged and refused to yield to any of the offers made by Vignesh’s lawyer.
Questions
When Vignesh found out that his work was used by Vinita, do you think his approach to this problem was ideal? If not, what could he have done instead?
Do you think it’s possible to prove if someone’s copied a form of art and if Vinita legitimately created her work without any inspiration, how could she have proven her innocence in this case study?
Is it possible for art to be replicated without actually copying it?
What were the miscommunications and ethical faults that took place throughout this case?
What could the lawyer have done to please and settle the conflict between both parties involved?
Comments
Post a Comment