Out and About

The final quarter of the year is looking to be a busy one. We (or at least one of us) will be speaking at the following events :

1. "The Artist and Copyright" at Art Singapore 2009 on Sunday, 11 October; and

2. "Intellectual Property Enforcement - An Overview of Trademark and Patent Cases" organised by the Law Society of Singapore on Thursday, 5 November.

We will also be attending FLAsia 2009 from 15 to 17 October and APAA 2009 from 18 to 22 November - do say hello if you are there as well.

Unlucky 13

The Criminal Investigation Department conducted simultaneous raids of 13 shops in Lucky Plaza yesterday, resulting in the arrest of 27 men and 1 woman, aged between 19 and 55 years old. The raids were carried out on the premise of trade mark and copyright infringement offences. Originally targetting the sale of pirated games and illegally modified gaming consoles, the CID's haul of 794 items eventually included desktop computers, laptops, external hard disks and memory sticks. The seized items had an estimated street value of S$60,000.

If found guilty, each offender is liable to pay a fine of up to S$10,000 per item (subject to a maximum of S$100,000) and may be imprisoned for up to 5 years.

David sues Goliath

Singapore's national broadcaster MediaCorp has been taken to court by an Internet start-up company RecordTV, for issuing groundless threats of legal action. In its defence, MediaCorp has filed a counterclaim for copyright infringement. Groundless threats are actionable under the Copyright Act, Trade Marks Act, Patents Act and Registered Designs Act.

As its name suggests, RecordTV's 2007-launched website allowed registered users to request recording of MediaCorp's free-to-air television programmes. In its opening statement in court, RecordTV said its service was merely an alternative to more traditional permitted means of recording television programmes at home, such as using a video cassette recorder or digital video recorder. The only difference was that RecordTV recordings were stored outside the user's premises. RecordTV has also contended that the recordings were made by its users, and not itself.

In reply, MediaCorp pointed to evidence gathered by its private investigators, which showed that unlike users of video cassette recorders, users of RecordTV's services had no control over functions such as recording and playback. Further, one of the private investigators had requested a 5-minute recording but received a 26-minute recording instead - this, MediaCorp suggested, was indicative that it was RecordTV and not the user that made the recordings.

Presided over by the Honourable Justice Andrew Ang, the 4-day hearing is slated to end today.

Interestingly, RecordTV stated that it bought the software from RecordTV USA. If this is the same RecordTV USA that the Los Angeles Federal court ruled against in 2001, then things do not look too optimistic for the start-up.

The long and short of it

Singapore has become rather well-known for her unusual fetish for acronyms.  See here and here.  There is even an alarmingly long list compiled by the people at Wikipedia. 

And here’s yet another – SAM or software asset management, which refers to recognising, managing and controlling the software that an organisation or business owns.   

The first step of SAM is to know exactly what software you own, and to ensure that you have not infringed anybody’s copyright.  The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore and the Singapore Infocomm Technology Federation launched a campaign yesterday to help small and medium enterprises stay clear of infringement suits by the Business Software Alliance, which represents software giants such as Microsoft, Symantec and Adobe.   

Businesses may from now till 21 June sign up for a voluntary software audit and if they are found to be using unlicensed products, they have 14 days to right the situation.  They may purchase licensed products at a discounted price up to 30 June.  The most reassuring part of the audit is that compliant businesses will have immunity from lawsuits up to 21 June 2010.  

The message from IPOS and SITF is clear : to avoid being sued by BSA for copyright infringement, SMEs are encouraged to sign up for the voluntary audit.  Other organisations such as ASME, DAS, SBF, SIA and SICC have also committed their support to this campaign.

Is your business SAM ready?

Radio streaming dries up under heat from licensing body

An amendment to the Copyright Act has resulted in the suspension of Internet streaming services by radio stations here. The amendment to Section 107B makes it an infringement of copyright to broadcast digital audio transmissions (whether by simulcast or re-transmission) through the Internet, unless otherwise authorised by the copyright owners (read : payment of licence fees to Recording Industry Performance Singapore, known also as RIPS).

RIPS is a collective licensing body that issues licences to broadcast music in Singapore. According to a report in TODAYOnline, RIPS represents 13 record companies and has been in negotiations with radio stations for licence fees in order that Internet streaming may continue. However, the licence fees tabled so far could potentially cost radio stations up to hundreds of thousands of dollars, a suggestion so unpalatable that all 22 stations (run by MediaCorp, Safra Radio and SPH UnionWorks) have chosen to suspend their online services until an agreement has been reached with RIPS.

Singin' the Blues

Local singer-songwriter Tanya Chua's application for a declaration of copyright ownership was denied by the High Court in October 2008. The reasons for the judgment were released on 31 March 2009 as Ms. Chua had filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

In 2002, Ms. Chua had entered into an agreement with her music publisher, agreeing among other things to "irrevocably and absolutely assign, convey and grant to the Publisher (the music publisher), its successors and assigns all rights and interests of every kind, nature and description in and to the ... Compositions created by the Writer (Ms. Chua) during the term of this Agreement." In return, the music publisher was to exploit the songs composed by Ms. Chua for which she would receive royalty payments.

In 2005, a second agreement was entered into by the parties. This agreement purported to extend the obligations of the parties under the earlier agreement till 17 March 2007. Ms. Chua had an option to extend the validity of this second agreement past 17 March 2007. However, the second agreement also contained clauses that expressly stated that certain terms of the earlier agreement would survive 17 March 2007.

The basis of Ms. Chua's application was that since she had not opted for the extension past 17 March 2007, the copyright in her compositions would revert back to her. She also alleged that the music publisher had continued to exploit the compositions past 17 March 2007 without her consent.

The High Court Judge found that the music publisher was entitled to continue exploiting the compositions past 17 March 2007, as the second agreement specifically stated that this right would survive past the said date. Further, the Judge also noted that Ms. Chua had "appeared to have completely overlooked the fact that she would continue to be paid royalties (in perpetuity) by the defendant for the ... compositions that she had assigned to the company. It was not a situation where she was put into bondage by the defendant without any consideration or benefit to her."

Indeed, it would appear that this reeks a little of biting the hand that feeds. According to the music publisher, it had pulled Ms. Chua out of the realm of anonymity and helped her gain celebrity status. Ms. Chua has won several awards since 2006, including Best Female Singer and Best Album Producer at the Taiwan Golden Melody Awards.

Well, now that an appeal has been filed, I can't help but hear Mr. Kravitz's falsetto ringing in my head, going "it ain't over till (the 3 judges say) it's over".

Citation : Chua Chian Ya v. Music & Movements (S) Pte Ltd. [2009] SGHC 75