0 evaluări0% au considerat acest document util (0 voturi)
116 vizualizări1 pagină
The case involved a complaint filed by the Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (FSCAP) against Benjamin Tan for allowing the playing of four musical compositions in his restaurant without obtaining the necessary license. While the court found that playing music in the restaurant constituted a public performance for profit under the Copyright Law, it ultimately dismissed the complaint. It ruled that the musical compositions were beyond the protection of the Copyright Law because they had long become public property due to the composers' failure to register the copyrights within the required time period under administrative rules.
The case involved a complaint filed by the Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (FSCAP) against Benjamin Tan for allowing the playing of four musical compositions in his restaurant without obtaining the necessary license. While the court found that playing music in the restaurant constituted a public performance for profit under the Copyright Law, it ultimately dismissed the complaint. It ruled that the musical compositions were beyond the protection of the Copyright Law because they had long become public property due to the composers' failure to register the copyrights within the required time period under administrative rules.
The case involved a complaint filed by the Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (FSCAP) against Benjamin Tan for allowing the playing of four musical compositions in his restaurant without obtaining the necessary license. While the court found that playing music in the restaurant constituted a public performance for profit under the Copyright Law, it ultimately dismissed the complaint. It ruled that the musical compositions were beyond the protection of the Copyright Law because they had long become public property due to the composers' failure to register the copyrights within the required time period under administrative rules.
Case Name: Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers vs Benjamin Tan
Case Citation: G.R. No. L-36402 March 16,1987
Facts: Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers is a non-profit association duly organized under the Corporation Law of the Philippines and registered with the SEC. It is the owner of certain musical compositions among which are the songs entitled: "Dahil Sa lyo," "Sapagkat Ikaw Ay Akin," "Sapagkat Kami Ay Tao Lamang" and 'The Nearness of You." On the other hand, Benjamin Tan is the operator of Alex Soda Foundation and Restaurant. The restaurant hires a combo with professional singers who play and sing musical compositions- to entertain and amuse its customers, and the above-mentioned compositions were being played and sung without any license or permission from the FSCAP. Because of this, FSCAP demanded from Tan payment of the necessary license fee for the playing and singing of the compositions but the demand was ignored. Hence, a complaint for copyright infringement was filed by FSCAP against Tan for allowing the playing in the latter’s restaurant of said songs copyrighted in FSCAP’s name. Tan did not deny the playing of said copyrighted compositions in his establishment, but he maintains that the mere singing and playing of songs and popular tunes even if they are copyrighted do not constitute an infringement. The RTC dismissed the complaint. The CA certified the case to the Supreme Court for adjudication on the legal question involved. Issues: (1) Whether or not the playing and signing of musical compositions which have been copyrighted inside an establishment constitute a public performance for profit within the meaning and contemplation of the Copyright Law of the Philippines; (2) Assuming that there were indeed public performances for profit, whether or not appellee can be held liable therefor Ruling: In the case at bar, it is admitted that the patrons of the restaurant in question pay only for the food and drinks and apparently not for listening to the music. As found by the trial court, the music provided is for the purpose of entertaining and amusing the customers in order to make the establishment more attractive and desirable. It will be noted that for the playing and singing the musical compositions involved, the combo was paid as independent contractors by the appellant. It is therefore obvious that the expenses entailed thereby are added to the overhead of the restaurant which are either eventually charged in the price of the food and drinks or to the overall total of additional income produced by the bigger volume of business which the entertainment was programmed to attract. Consequently, it is beyond question that the playing and singing of the combo in defendant- appellee's restaurant constituted performance for profit contemplated by the Copyright Law. Nevertheless, Tan cannot be said to have infringed upon the Copyright Law. His allegation that the composers of the contested musical compositions waived their right in favor of the general public when they allowed their intellectual creations to become property of the public domain before applying for the corresponding copyrights for the same is correct. Under "Paragraph 33 of Patent Office Administrative Order No. 3 entitled 'Rules of Practice in the Philippines Patent Office relating to the Registration of Copyright Claims', an intellectual creation should be copyrighted thirty days (Manila)and sixty days (if made elsewhere) after its publication, failure of which renders such creation public property. In this case, it is clear that the musical compositions in question had long become public property for failure to observe the aforesaid rules on registration. Therefore, said musical compositions are beyond the protection of the Copyright Law.
John Richard Ludbrooke Youell, an Underwriter at Lloyd's London for Himself and as a Representative of Those Other Underwriters at Lloyd's London Severally Subscribing to Certain Global Corporate Excess Insuring Agreements at Issue and the Following London Market Insurance Companies and Other International Underwriting Entities, Also Severally Subscribing to the Insuring Agreements at Issue, Each on Their Own Behalf and Not for the Other v. Exxon Corporation, 48 F.3d 105, 2d Cir. (1995)