Talk:Bollywood films and plagiarism

We asked people to cite at least one review claiming plagiarism, and discuss the pros and cons at the article for the film. No one is bothering to do that. People are just putting up accusations and leaving. Are we going to have to do a weekly prune of allegations that don't meet the standard? Zora 23:44, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Cite a reliable source or it should be deleted
I see lot of movies that are uncited and those that are cited are often cited from unreliable sources. Reliables sources are newspaper, journal articles and any other scholarly work. People will find movies that they see similar to movies that they saw before. For example, all sports are similar where under-dogs win against some big dogs. To accuse Lagaan for plagiarism of Mighty Duck or any other sport movies is ridicules. There are so many American movies where Alien invade the Earth or horror movie of where the killer is on the lose and killing people but if Bollywood do any of those common theme that movie will be accused of plagiarism Tarikur (talk) 00:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

'''What we are putting here is movies that are ALLEGED to contain plagiarized material. There is no way to prove plagiarism beyond doubt. It is not possible to find a newspaper entry for every plagiarised film. If someone has seen both the Hollywood and Bollywood film and feels that a particular entry is unjustified, they are free to remove that entry. But instead some people think they are King of wikipedia and are wholesale deleting other people's entries. No one has the right to delete another's entries. If you do so we will revise revert back your changes.'''

'''This list is no way a true picture. To make the picture clear add a column to describe what is really copied (and what is original in the movie). Many of the entries are not having enough merit to get honored ;) in this list. Probably having this column will make sure that only rightful entries get into it by discarding any entry without any detail.''' Toakhilesh (talk) 08:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

j
Sarkar cannot be considered a plagerized movie. In no shape or form did that movie copy anything from the Godfather aside from the way Abhishek Bachchan sat in the chair (in the manner of Michael Corleone) for a few minute scene near the end of the movie. And Ram Gopal Verma specifically said that his movie was inspired by the Godfather, even though the stories of both movies are extremely different. Namantra 14 July 2006

Fight Club is also completely different than the American Fight Club. Same name doesn't mean plagarized. Which makes me wonder if people who add these actually watch the movies.... Namantra 6 August 2006
 * Respectfully, have you actually seen both movies? The font and some of the background music is lifted directly from the American version.  And the "rules of fight club" refered to twice the the Hindi version is one of the most famous parts of the American Version.  It's really hard to miss that.  --Richrobison 00:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite
Due to the failure of this list to be maintained at acceptable standards of verifiability, a proposed rewrite has been started here. See also the Indian cinema WikiProject's talk page. --Sam Blanning(talk) 17:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I support Samuel's initiative and have added another film to the rewrite. This article is out of control now. It is full of baseless accusations. Zora 00:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I think it's safe to just replace what's there now with the rewrite. I am little worried about "plagiarism" because there is a lot of borrowing which shouldn't exactly be classified under the label of plagiarism... gren グレン 07:59, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. A few things I should mention:


 * 1) I didn't write up Jo Bole So Nihaal -- Crocodile Dundee, for which a source was added here, but the source is very much a passing mention and didn't give me anything to go on. I tried searching on Factiva, but found no articles that mentioned the similarity.
 * 2) I did write up Ek Ajnabee -- Man on Fire, but realised afterwards that as the makers never claimed that it wasn't a remake, it doesn't deserve to be called 'plagiarism'. I posted it on User talk:Samuel Blanning/Hindi films and plagiarism, which is now a redirect, but if anyone strongly disagrees they can look in the history.
 * 3) I removed "Film songs alleged to contain plagiarism", which is more an advert for the site it links to than a reliable source of songs that can be said to have been plagariased. I also removed "Bahasa Indonesia songs inspired by Hindi songs" - the only link is a 404.

There's also a commented-out bit at the top of the list which makes clear that sources are expected, and if anyone knows of a verifiable case but doesn't know how to use inline citation, they're welcome to nominate films on this talk page. I hope that this new layout satisfies everyone. It should certainly be easier to maintain, and I no longer think deletion is necessary. --Sam Blanning(talk) 16:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

KAANTE
Kaante, the 2002 movie, directed by Sanjay Gupta totally ripped off Quentin Tarintino's Reservoir Dogs. Though it also stole from The Usual Suspects.
 * According to a Times of India article I found, Gupta "doesn't shy from admitting that the film is a remake of Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir Dogs". In my opinion if you acknowledge your source, it's not plagiarism. --Sam Blanning(talk) 13:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it is still plagiarism because he doesn't acknowledge the source in the movie(in the credits), isn't that right? Fkh82 22:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Chori Chori and Dil hai to maanta nahin
Both based on It Happened One Night

Karma
The Dirty Dozen

The Others
does anyone know the name of the hindi film which copied 'the others' starring nicole kidman ? THE BOLLYWOOD ADAPTATION IS 100% copy its not even funny !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaygajera (talk • contribs) 02:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hum Kaun Hain It starred Amitabh Bachhan and Dimple Kapadia.Hope this helps!

The title is Hum Kaun Hai? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.226.203.85 (talk) 01:54, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Baazigar
A Kiss Before Dying

Papi Gudiya
Child's Play

Ek Ruka Hua Faisla
12 Angry Men

Qaidi
First Blood

Agni Sakshi, Daraar and Yaraana
Sleeping with the Enemy.

Webpage for list
I found following webpage has list of movies. Not sure which will be qualified as plagiarised ones from wikipedia standard. http://www.akhilesh.in/life/india/bollywoodinspirations.php

''I have been maintaining this list for past some time now. The aim is to list down the movies based on the amount of copy/inspiration done. This is indeed difficult to quantify as the nature and number of pieces lifted vary and difficult to judge. There are various components that a movie copies from other movies. As mentioned in this WiKi that music is one, but then there are others things also, like in one account I rememebr lifting of entire original movie clip of few seconds.

My question right now is: in this WiKi are we going to mention only the movie which copies the main plot or major plot(s), or this also aims to capture the other types of plagiarization?

Example of Scene Lifting:
 * Dumb and Dumber's Urine in the Bottle scene, copied in Mela
 * Matrix's Building Shootout Scene, copied in Awara Paagal Deewana
 * A James Bond movie's villains den scene, 2-3 seconds of orinial clip lifted in a Devanand's movie (do not rememebr the name right now).

Note: I have added the above link in the External Links section. Hope that is OK.''

Toakhilesh (talk) 12:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

song
The song Nasha Yeh Pyaar Ka from Mann is an exact copy of Toto Cutugno's L'Italiano. 69.244.234.39 17:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 17:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Oldboy/Zinda and Hitch/Partners
I find that some of you guys are a little too zealous and overboard in the management of this article. Case in point, the films Zinda and Partners are so obvious copies that they are already in the danger of being sued by the original owners for infringements [] [] and yet these items are being removed from the list? How more concrete can you get with this? Websites that state the exact plot similarities [] are not allowed, individual reviews from multiple sites are apparently are not allowed either. And yet any editor with an account is allegedly more credible than any of these sources.

Look at it this way. The Zinda article itself has all the comparisons showing beyond a doubt the extent of the plagiarism. To fit such a list of contents for every single movie tht can be listed here will make this article ridiculously long, complicated and unfriendly to the reader. The visitors to Wikipedia does not deserve this eyesore, but your removal of Zinda from the list makes it seem like its the only way to go. Zhanzhao (talk) 18:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm going according to policies. I'm thus requiring sources and I believe only to sources, not your words that the films are "...so obvious copies that they are already in the danger of being sued..."
 * Cite sources and this discussion will, too, be unnecessary. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  19:01, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to make it clear to you Zhanzhao, imdb, bollycat, letfilmi, akhilesh, oneindia are all unreliable. There might have been others which I did not catch. I suggest you to read first WP:RS, that will help you understand the matter. Newspapers are most welcomed for example. Also, the sources must mention the fact that a film is plagiarised. If it says that it is a remake - it is not alleged of pagiarism. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  19:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The sources for the the lawsuits are mentioned in the original movie articles, which was why I placed the links there. I don't wish to junk everything about the cases in this article as well, since wiki gave us the capability to link. But since it takes too hard to even click on the movie article, I've added the direct links to the lawsuits here as well. As for the technicality of it being plagiarised or not, 1) The directors have not credited the original owners/films for their inspirations. Merely stating that it is a remake is lipservice. If it IS indeed a bona fide remake, they would be officially acknowledging the sources AND paying for the rights to use the ideas. [], which is what is being done for Don.

Clarifications for identifying plagiarism
Obviously the confusion here is the definition of plagiarism, as well as the "credibility" of sources. this is what I feel.

Messenger VS Message

Granted, one may say that blogs or even sites like akhilesh may not be mainstream as newspapers. However, it does not take an expert to point out similarities, one just needs to have satched both the source and the copy, and be able to pinpoint AND state the exact nature of what is copied, be it core plot points or scene-for-scene shots.

For akhilesh, it has a "Copy Detail" link for most of the items linked which gives a breakdown of what exactly is being copied. Its merely a statement of fact. One does not need to hold a phD in film studies to catch these.

Definition of Plagiarism

There are a few tests for this.

1) 1st is the actual copying of content and ideas. This can be easily spotted, all one needs is to have seen both movies, or even read detailed synopsis for both (of course "scene-for-scene" and "shot for shot" accusations require actual watching of the film to be substantiated. But easy to spot. One or two similar scenes can scrape past with the homage moniker. But not when it gets to the extent that many people go "hey, that movie is just like that other movie I saw". As compared to "hey, that scene is just like that scene I saw in that other movie".

2) Crediting the source. One may say that just merely "saying" that one credits a particular film for inspiration is crediting. But one must consider that we are talking about commercial enterprises where rights and intellectual property equals to hard cash. Its good to know that some directors at least admit that they took their sources from a particular movie, but is the source actually being "credited" or acknowledged anywhere?

Were rights paid for or secured to make a remake? Is there a "Based on a novel/film by ..." anywhere in the OFFICIAL film/press releases? (Non official ones do not count. In fact its these that are pointing out the cases of plagiarism... and if the director himself does not admit it, the implications are understood). The film Don is headed in the right direction by FAILING the 2nd criteria I identified since it acknowledged and paid for the rights to use the ideaas in the original film. Now how many of the films on the original list can make the same claim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhanzhao (talk • contribs) 21:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree with everything. But you must cite sources and in this article specifically regardless of other articles they appear in. Akhilesh is not reliable, therefore is not here to stay under no circumstances whatsoever. The rules must be followed. In any case this list is considered for total removal, as nothing encyclopedic and beneficial (except for vandalism and policy violation) does not come from it. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  21:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Zinda is an a prime example of plagiarism
This rampant so-called "protectionism" is getting ridiculous. Case in point. Zinda had already been identified by the distributors of the original Oldboy film as being a copycat. A lawsuit is possibly even pending. []. The links are given both here, on the individual film's articles as well as in this discussion above. Search Google for Zinda and Oldboy and see what you get. Go to the Zinda and you even get a point for point partial list of the parts of the films that were copied, plotwise as well as cinematogrphy. And yet it does not qualify as alleged or even outright plagiarism because it keeps getting removed. Onus is on the ones removing this films and other films to justify why this is so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhanzhao (talk • contribs) 13:49, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Reliability of sources
All the sites pass the the reliability and burden of proof test.

Oneindia.in = Mainstream News site

hindu.com = Mainstream News site

thaindian.com = Mainstream News site

slough.gov.uk government/public website

desiclub.com = Entertainmetn news site

Timesofindia = Mainstream news site

twitchfilm.net = Entertainment news portal. Provides English translation of original Korean news article

indyarocks.com = Direct interview with director

iefilmi.com = Association of entertainment personalities and journalists

Bollywoodcountry.com = Entertainment news website. Co-edited by noted director/film critic Subhash K. Jha.

Bollywoodmantra.com = Article written by professional media journalist

None are self pubblished. And in the cases of interviews, or explicitely named writers, the writers' work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. In the case of the non English article, I provided a site with the translation.

Onus, as before, is on User:Shshshsh to prove why even when the sites or should be considered unreliable even though by definition they are allowed as per WP:RS and WP:Burden.


 * I don't remember removing The Times of India and The Hindu.
 * Oneindia is not a reliable site - who is the owner? What are his credentials? Where are the offices?
 * Desiclub?????????/ It is a BLOG site!!!
 * bollycat, bollymantra and whatever you have therei s not reliable, unless you can prove it. Saying "mainstream" or "news site" does not help.
 * As for direct interviews, how do you know that this interview is real???? If the site is uneliable, so it obviously means we can't rely on it. And how do you know that it really was Subhash K Jha who wrote the article, and not just a way to fake the author's name?
 * Read WP:RS and then you will understand that these sites are just rubbish.
 * Read WP:BURDEN and you will understand that because you are the one who added the sources, you are the one who has to prov their reliability when they are questioned. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  12:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bollywood_films_and_plagiarism&diff=270060436&oldid=270059387Zhanzhao (talk) 12:46, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * See contact us page
 * Its not.
 * And why so?
 * Onus is on you to prove the sites are rubbish and not written by the supposed personalities.


 * Onus is on you because you are the one who adds them. Desiclub is a blog and I can bring you someone to help out. The diff you show me is a diff when I made a full revert because there was an entire mess but later when I made a cleanup they were left by me. If these sites are reliable, prove that. See WP:RS, WP:V to learn how to do it. Shahid  •  Talk 2 me  12:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * First off, I had to do some simple formating for you. With a simple cut and paste. Please learn forper syntax and formating.


 * And another thing. Desiclub is not a blog. Its a Entertainment portal. Zhanzhao (talk) 14:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Validity of sources
Since User:Shshshsh refuses to give reasons for why sites were banned, I shall get this ball rolling again for the benefit of everyone.

One of the sources: Iefilmi.com.

The site of the India-EU Film Initiative. Headed by Jag Mundhra - Movie director, and Pervaiz Alam - a former award-winning BBC journalist, iscreenwriter and documentary film-maker., who also edits the site.

We'll run this down WP:RS.

Given the credentials of its members and its editor, its definitely credible.

Given the organizations role and objectives, its obviously subject to peer review.

It is not self-published, being the site of an actual organization.

Its an official website for an actual organisation involved with the Indian film industry in an objective level and stand.

And yet according th user:Shshshsh's edit [] iefilm.com, one of the organization's official website is not allowed, with all the films sourced from that site being removed from the "films with alleged plagiarism" list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhanzhao (talk • contribs) 12:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

edit warring, protected
I've protected the page 3 days based on the request at WP:RFPP. Please sort this out, here, rather than edit warring when protection expires. rootology ( C )( T ) 14:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Article for deletion
I'm considering placing this article for deletion. It lacks any decent sources except for a list of films which are "alleged" to contain plagiarism. The article is not encyclopedic and I think the main points can be covered adequately in the main article without resorting to this as it stands anyway unless somebody can find some decent books to write a good article. Why do we need an article about copied films or films which may bear some resemblance to Hollywood films?? Surely there is some disagreement on what is direct plagiarism and what bears a little resemblance. So Bollywood produces a mass of films and occasionally may use ideas from other films. So what? Has anybody from Hollywood ever sued anybody in Bollywood for copied films?? Dr. Blofeld      White cat 11:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually yes. Zinda/Oldboy and the Partner_(2007_film/(Hitch (film) pending lawsuits were stated in the main article.Zhanzhao (talk) 12:18, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

@Dr. Blofeld - If nobody have sued you so far for stealing doesn't mean that it is okay to steal. Please don't delete this very important article which exposes the dirty side of hindi film industry. Without such exposure we will never have original films. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.230.248.1 (talk) 18:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Going out on a limb here, it seems that this article has been deleted by some overtly zealous Bollywood/Indian fans. How can you even doubt that there is plagiarism in Bollywood? Are you guys blind? or just in denial? If people are not picked upon for stealing they will continue to steal and thrive (case: Pritam), as a country I believe it is time we should anally probe every content maker into being original and not thieves. Wikipedia should not be a tool for assholes to justify being talent less jerks, we should be the force which brings the truth out. Many people in India don't even know the extent of deceit content makers are extending to them. I think more than stealing content, this issue is more about deceit and lying to people who pay for these products. As an Indian I feel disappointed that some people are trying to justify this blatant lack of originality in our culture by citing rules about notifications and citations. There, I said it. Ban me.

See the complete list of copied movies
As far as people who are demanding sources, I only have one thing to say that you don't even need to see the complete movie, just when you see the plots, you can easily conclude plagiarism. Some can be verified by just looking at the posters only. Also many movies are also copied scene by scene and dialogue by dialogue.

And I have not even mentioned movies which are not directly copied from a single movie but consist of its scenes being copied from a range of different movies.

There are more and many more but let me add a few more examples:

Partner ( Hitch)

Deewane Huye Paagal ( There is something about Mary)

Desi Boyz ( Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo)

Kyon Ki Main Jhuth Nahin Bolta ( Liar Liar)

Players (The Italian Job)

Dhoom 3 ( The Prestige)

Housefull ( Meet the Parents)

Satte Pe Satta ( Seven Brides for Seven Brothers)

Agneepath ( Scarface)

The Burning Train (Shinkansen daibakuha)

The list goes on and on...... see this link - http://www.imdb.com/list/ls004057481/

115.246.69.25 (talk) 16:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Nitin Singh

Protected edit request on 15 April 2022
Please replace the page's contents with  in order to fix the double redirect. Thanks! 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him &#124; talk) 22:39, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Please also add
 * for redirect categorization. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him &#124; talk) 22:46, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Jake Wartenberg (talk) 19:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Jake Wartenberg (talk) 19:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)