Bollywood Industry Faces Major Dispute Over Virtual Print Fee (VPF): PVR, Inox, Cinepolis Clash with Producers
The Bollywood entertainment industry is currently embroiled in a significant financial and contractual dispute that has sent ripples across cinema chains and production houses alike. At the heart of this controversy lies the contentious issue of the Virtual Print Fee (VPF), a fee paid by producers to multiplex chains for digital film distribution. This ongoing tussle has not only impacted upcoming film releases but also raised critical questions about the future of film distribution and revenue-sharing models in Bollywood.
The Origin of the Conflict: VPF and the Power Dynamics in Bollywood
Virtual Print Fee, or VPF, is a fee paid by film producers to multiplex chains like PVR, Inox, and Cinepolis to cover the costs associated with digital cinema projection. Traditionally, VPF was introduced to facilitate the transition from traditional film reels to digital projection, streamlining distribution and reducing costs. However, in recent times, VPF has evolved into a contentious point, as multiplex chains seek to continue levying this fee, while many producers argue it is an unfair burden, especially when other revenue streams are declining.
Bollywood Hungama has been closely monitoring the escalating tension between the major cinema chains and production houses, which has culminated in a series of confrontations over unpaid or disputed VPF amounts. The crux of the issue lies in the contractual obligations, the timing of payments, and the interpretation of agreements signed between chains and producers.
The Jolly LLB 3 Controversy: A Wake-up Call for Bollywood
Last month marked a pivotal moment when PVR Inox, one of the largest multiplex chains in India, suspended advance bookings for the highly anticipated film Jolly LLB 3, starring Bollywood stalwarts Akshay Kumar and Arshad Warsi. This decision was directly linked to the film’s producer, Star Studio18, refusing to pay the VPF, citing financial disputes and disagreements over the terms of the fee.
Sources report that PVR Inox initially halted advance bookings just 12 hours before the first show was scheduled to begin—a move that sent shockwaves through the industry. Although the studio eventually paid the VPF, it did so under protest, emphasizing that the payment was made reluctantly and with the intention of continuing dialogue on the matter. This incident underscored the fragility of agreements and the potential for disruptive consequences when disputes remain unresolved.
Emerging Disputes: The Case of Single Salma
More than a month after the Jolly LLB 3 controversy, a new flashpoint has emerged surrounding Single Salma, a film produced by Star Studio18. The film features Huma Qureshi in the lead role, with Shreyas Talpade and Sunny Singh also part of the cast. Interestingly, Huma Qureshi was also part of Jolly LLB 3, adding a layer of interconnectedness to these disputes.
According to industry insiders, Star Studio18 requested a VPF waiver from both PVR Inox and Cinepolis for Single Salma. However, these requests were reportedly declined, fueling fears that unless a resolution is reached, the film may face a limited release—potentially only in non-national, regional theaters.
Trade analysts estimate that Single Salma could be released on approximately 200 screens nationwide. The film’s limited release would significantly impact its commercial prospects, and industry experts see this as a reflection of the broader tensions between producers and multiplex chains over VPF payments.
Legal and Regulatory Developments: The Role of the Competition Commission of India
The ongoing dispute caught the attention of regulatory authorities when, on September 30, 2025, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) announced an investigation into PVR Inox Limited. The investigation centers on allegations that PVR Inox is abusing its dominant market position by continuing to levy VPF charges on film producers, despite contractual agreements suggesting these fees should phase out.
Documents reveal that PVR Inox had signed agreements with major producers like Star Studio18 (Viacom18) and Yash Raj Films (YRF), which included “sunset clauses”—provisions that mandated the discontinuation of VPF payments by December 2024. However, PVR Inox claimed that these sunset clauses had not yet been implemented and remained subject to renegotiation.
In its defense, PVR argued that YRF and Viacom18 are only eligible for the sunset clauses if they cease paying VPF to other exhibitors and digital cinema equipment providers. The company maintained that until these conditions are met, the continuation of VPF levies is justified. This legal wrangling highlights the complex contractual landscape that underpins the current conflict.
Implications for the Bollywood Industry and Future Film Releases
The fallout from these disputes extends far beyond individual films. The ongoing VPF controversy threatens to disrupt the traditional release schedules of upcoming Bollywood movies and could alter how distribution and revenue-sharing are managed in the industry. Producers are increasingly concerned about the financial viability of their projects, especially when facing the threat of limited theatrical releases and reduced revenue streams.
Moreover, the dispute underscores the growing influence of multiplex chains in shaping industry dynamics. While these chains argue that VPF is essential for maintaining the quality and infrastructure of digital cinemas, producers contend that such fees are an unfair financial burden, especially in a market where digital distribution costs are diminishing.
The Broader Context: Changing Economics of Bollywood Films
India’s Bollywood industry is no stranger to upheaval, but the current VPF conflict exemplifies the shifting economic landscape. With changing consumer preferences, the rise of OTT platforms, and fluctuating box office revenues, producers are increasingly scrutinizing their costs and revenue models.
In this context, the role of digital distribution and the associated fees like VPF have become a focal point of debate. Industry insiders suggest that a re-evaluation of these contractual arrangements is necessary to ensure a sustainable future for Bollywood filmmaking. The ongoing legal investigations and industry dialogues aim to strike a balance between fair compensation for cinema chains and the financial health of producers.
Looking Ahead: Potential Resolutions and Industry Outlook
The resolution of the VPF dispute remains uncertain, but industry stakeholders remain hopeful for an amicable solution. Negotiations between multiplex chains and producers are ongoing, with regulatory authorities like the CCI providing oversight to prevent abuse of market dominance.
Experts believe that a pragmatic approach, involving clear contractual frameworks and transparent negotiations, is essential to restore stability. Such measures will help ensure that Bollywood films continue to reach audiences across India and internationally while maintaining a healthy economic ecosystem.
As Bollywood navigates this turbulent phase, the industry’s resilience and adaptability will be tested. The outcome of this dispute could set important precedents for future distribution practices and contractual agreements, shaping the cinematic landscape for years to come.
Conclusion
The ongoing VPF controversy highlights the complex interplay of economics, contractual obligations, and market power within Bollywood. While the dispute has led to temporary setbacks and limited releases, it also presents an opportunity for stakeholders to reevaluate and reform their operational models. For Bollywood to thrive amid these challenges, collaborative solutions that balance the interests of multiplex chains, producers, and regulators are essential.
As fans eagerly await the release of upcoming blockbusters, the industry’s response to this crisis will determine whether Bollywood can continue its legacy of vibrant storytelling, innovative filmmaking, and global appeal in a fair and sustainable manner.
