Can a Signature Move Be Someone’s Intellectual Property?
When MS Dhoni revolutionized the game with his “Helicopter Shot”, a mere on-drive clipped off his ankles transitioned from a stroke to an identity in world sport. You see kids on playgrounds copying it, academies teach it and the fans identify it only with Dhoni. This leaves a fascinating legal question:
Can a signature sports act such as Dhoni’s helicopter shot be protected as someone’s intellectual property in India?
Can You Copyright a Sports Move?
No, because the Copyright Act, 1957 prescribes that there must be an original work and such is expressed in a tangible form protected. It must also fall under accepted categories including literary, artistic, musical and dramatic works.
A sports move, however, is:
- A technique of playing,
- Performed spontaneously, and
- Was not designed as a static work of art.
- Why it doesn’t pass the copyright test
Requirement | Does a Move Qualify? | Why Not? |
Originality | Partially | Innovation alone is not enough |
Tangible Expression | No | Not fixed in a tangible creative form |
Copyright Category | No | Functional, non-artistic |
Cloudy legal concepts such as this one is actually driven by a fundamental principle: Sports moves like an individual yoga pose, wrestling hold or bowling delivery are treated as techniques of performance, and techniques cannot be copyrighted.
What About Choreography?
Choreography is protectable if it contains a pre-choreographed artistic sequence when recorded or notated. Though it may be tempting to compare such logic with an original sports move, the law distinguishes between artistic expression and functional skill. A cricket shot is performed to achieve a competitive advantage, not for aesthetic expression and this isn’t a suitable case for copyright protection.
Performers’ Rights: A Limited Shield
Athletes are given performance rights under Section 38 of the Copyright Act. These rights protect:
- against unauthorised recording of the performance,
- reproducing and broadcasting the performance, and
- right to collect royalty in commerce.
But those rights exist in the performance as a whole, not an individual move within it. Dhoni might oversee the commercial use of his recorded performance, but he can do nothing to prevent people from playing the helicopter shot.
BACK-UP PLAN: What You Should Know about Trademark and Personality Rights
- Trademark (More Practical)
You can’t trademark a move, but you can trademark a branded likeness of that move. Globally:
- Usain Bolt trademarked his lightning pose,
- At the heart of it all is Michael Jordan’s “Jumpman”, which is a logo that’s trademarked and
- Cristiano Ronaldo cashes in “CR7” and his “Siuu” celebration.
If Dhoni comes out with a logo or branded symbol of the helicopter shot, he can protect it under trade mark laws.
- Personality/Publicity Rights
The strategy, if used in advertising to play on Dhoni’s image without permission, could be construed as unauthorised commercial exploitation. The persona, not the move, is what the law here protects.
Conclusion
The lines between sports, entertainment and branding continue to be blur in a world where signature athletic manoeuvres are cultural and commercial touchstones. Current Indian law does not allow a signature move to be copyrighted, but its brand and commercial identity, and the persona attached to it, can be protected under other legal paths.
So basically, Dhoni might not have been able to lay down the law on the helicopter shot itself but he can take care of it as an aspect of his personality and brand, and even monetise its association with him.
As intellectual property develops, the law may eventually be forced to take on an increasingly new-age question:
And if artistic creativity is protectable, then why not sporting innovation next?
Authored by Himanshu Rana
