Idea vs Expression-Analysing The Dismissal Of Copyright Suit In Shah vs Netflix Case

Published: 2026-04-15 06:09:08 ET NFLX

Published on 04/15/2026 at 06:09 am EDT

INTRODUCTION

New York, September 30, 2025 – the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Indian filmmaker Soham Shah against Netflix, Inc., Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC, and Squid Game creator Hwang Dong-Hyuk. Shah alleged that the globally successful 2021 South Korean television series Squid Game infringed the copyright of his 2009 Hindi film, Luck, and its 2008 screenplay.

Justice Ronnie Abrams granted Netflix's motion to dismiss the complaint, finding that Shah failed to establish ownership of the 2009 Hindi film Luck and its screenplay, and that, in any event, Luck and Squid Game are not substantially similar.

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

Plaintiff: Soham Shah, an Indian citizen, screenwriter, scriptwriter and director who alleges creation and exclusive ownership of a "Luck Story" (2006), a 2008 Luck Screenplay, and certain interests in the 2009 Luck Film. He registered the Story with the Screenwriters Association of India (2007) and the title with the Association of Motion Pictures & TV Programme Producers in 2007; he later provided the Screenplay to the Indian producer Shree Ashtavinayak Cine Vision Ltd. under contracts in 2008. He submitted a U.S. registration application for the Screenplay (September 2024) that was pending at the time of the opinion.

Defendants: Netflix, Inc. and Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC (Delaware corporations with principal places of business in California; Netflix, Inc. has offices in the Southern District of New York); and Hwang Dong-Hyuk (South Korean writer/creator of Squid Game). Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC holds U.S. copyrights to Squid Game season one. Plaintiff alleges Hwang has attended events and contracted in the Southern District.

THE FACTS IN ISSUE

Luck (Film and Screenplay): A 2009 Hindi feature film based on Shah's 2008 Screenplay. The Film follows Ram Mehra, a man in India who, motivated by debt and a desire for a U.S. visa, is recruited to play a series of life-or-death contests run by a character named Musa (creator) and his frontman Tamaang. The Film's central motif is luck, selecting contestants who are uniquely lucky and staging perilous games that exploit luck (gun roulette, parachute jump, handcuffed shipping container in ocean, train rescue). The Film features Bollywood stylistic elements including musical numbers, choreographed sequences, and several subplots (romance between Ram and Natasha, protagonist's unique luck condition). The Film was released worldwide (India, U.K., U.S., UAE, Canada, Romania, Russia) and reportedly starred major Bollywood names. Shemaroo later filed a copyright registration application for the Film in India.

Squid Game (Season 1): A nine-episode 2021 Korean drama created by Hwang, following Seong Gi-hun, a debt-stricken protagonist recruited to play a sequence of children's games with fatal stakes. Features nearly 456 contestants, children's games retooled as deadly contests (e.g., red light/green light, ddakji recruitment, honeycomb carving, marbles, tug-of-war, glass tile hopscotch, final "squid game"), numbered players, uniformed masked guards, a dystopian isolated playhouse, televised/observed elements, and subplots (organ harvesting, police detective's search for a missing brother, twist that elderly Oh Il-nam created the game).

PROCEDURAL POSTURE

Plaintiff filed a complaint on September 13, 2024, seeking damages and injunctive relief for alleged copyright infringement of the Screenplay and Film. Defendants moved to dismiss: Hwang moved under Rule 12(b)(2) (lack of personal jurisdiction); Netflix moved under Rule 12(b)(6) (failure to state a claim and lack of standing). The Court assumed personal jurisdiction over Hwang for purposes of resolving the facial sufficiency of the complaint because the court indisputably had jurisdiction over Netflix and the jurisdictional facts as to Hwang were disputed. The Court then addressed Rule 12(b)(6) grounds and dismissed the complaint with prejudice.

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY PARTIES

Plaintiff's principal allegations

Shah alleged that he is the exclusive owner of the Luck Story and Screenplay and that the Luck Story/Screenplay (and Film as manifested) contain protectible characters, plot, themes, and treatment that Netflix and Hwang copied in Squid Game (complaint cites 16 plot similarities and 29 character parallels). He alleged the Film was widely released and therefore accessible to Defendants (spoken dialogue, printed subtitles, screening) and that this provided access. He also alleged a continuing ownership interest under Indian law in the Film (royalty/"utilisation" interests), and contended that Shree's and Shemaroo's apparent copyright filings do not negate his rights. He sought relief for infringement of both the Screenplay and the Film.

Defendants' principal arguments

LEGAL STANDARDS THE COURT APPLIED

The Court applied familiar Second Circuit and Supreme Court standards on (1) personal jurisdiction, (2) Rule 12(b)(6) pleadings, and (3) copyright-specific doctrines:

Key differences included:

Author's Note

The ruling reinforces core principles of copyright law. First, when a U.S. court assesses standing for a work of foreign origin, it will look to the law of the work's country of origin to determine ownership, but the plaintiff must still satisfy the U.S. requirement of owning an "exclusive right" to sue. Shah's reliance on a right to share proceeds proved insufficient to meet this threshold.

Second, the ruling serves as a powerful reminder that ideas are not protectable under copyright, only the unique expression of those ideas is. The shared concept of "debt-ridden people in a deadly game" is an unprotectable idea. The Court focused on the fundamental differences in the works' narrative structure, character development, atmosphere, genre (Bollywood action versus Korean drama), and specific plot details. Ultimately, a successful copyright claim requires copying more than just a generalized theme; it requires the appropriation of the author's distinct, creative expression.

For further information please contact at S.S Rana & Co. email: [email protected] or call at (+91- 11 4012 3000). Our website can be accessed at www.ssrana.in

Nitika Sinha S.S. Rana & Co. Advocates 81/2, 2nd & 3rd Floors Aurobindo Square, Sri Aurobindo Marg Adhchini New Delhi Delhi 110017 INDIA Tel: 114012-3000 Fax: 114012-3000 E-mail: [email protected] URL: www.ssrana.in