For both, the answer lays in our Intellectual Property Rights Law. However, we must carefully examine how this law translates into reality in our context as far as dramatic/theatrical works are concerned. First, let us deal with the statute as it is found under The Indian Copyright Act, 1957.
Section 13, sub section (1) of the Act includes original "dramatic" works, amongst others that can be copyrighted. What are of equal importance are the Notes to the Act. In one such important note, the word 'original' has been explained.
I reproduce that note (Marking in bold is for emphasis):
The word 'original' does not in this connection mean that the work must be the expression or original or inventive thought, Copyright Acts are not concerned with the origin of ideas, but with the expression of thought; and in the case of 'literary work' with the expression of thought in print or writing. The originality which is required relates to the expression of the thought; but the Act does not require that the expression must be in an original or novel form, but that the work must not be copied from another work - that it should originate from the author.
In order to obtain copyright production for literary, domestic, musical and artistic works, the subject dealt with need not be original, nor the ideas expressed be something novel. What is required is the expenditure of original skill or labor in execution and not originality of thought.
No original thought or original research is required in order that a literary work may be deemed to be original. The standard of originality which is required is a low one.
In modern complex society provisions have to be made for protecting every man's copyright, whether high or small, whether involving a high degree of originality as in a new poem or picture, or only originality at the vanishing point as in a law report.
Thus, there are two main points that can be gauged from the word "dramatic" and the word "original" as far as the copyright law is concerned:
1) "Dramatic" includes the production and not just the play script (which could be subsumed under "literary" work as well), and
2) The word 'original' in the Act is not concerned with any individual take or idea/s on originality.
In all fairness, the explanatory note on the word 'original', does not endorse copying, though this can be a matter of interpretation, and which would obviously differ from one case to the other.