YES, a person may photocopy some of pages of Professor Rosario’s book for as long as it is not for public use or distribution and it does not copy the substantial text or “heart” of the book. It is considered as fair use of the copyrighted work.
NO. One of the limitations on copyright is the making of quotations from a published work if they are compatible with fair use, provided that the source and the name of the author, if appearing on the work, are mentioned. The legal opinion made by Liza is consistent with fair use since the quoted part is merely used to explain a concept of law for the benefit of the client and not to defeat the rights of the author over his copyright. (Sec. 184.1 (b), IPC)
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be considered shall include:
a. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
b. The nature of the copyrighted work;
c. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
d. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work (Section 185.1 of the Intellectual Property Code)
Based on these factors, the invocation of the doctrine of fair use is not proper. The reproduction of the copies is commercial in nature, where the entire book is reproduced thereby violating the economic right of the author and the offer to the public of copies of the book has an injurious effect upon the potential market or value of the copyrighted work.
YES, Miss Solis may be held liable. Animus furandi or intention to pirate is not an element of infringement; hence, an honest intention is no defense to an action for infringement.
a. YES. Victoria Hotel may be held liable for infringing copyrights of the said videotapes because the reproduction and distribution thereof are not merely for private viewing. Instead, it was used as a means to gain extra profit by making it as an extra amenity for its hotel services. However, if such performances contained in the videotapes became available to the public even prior to its registration, then there is no copyright infringement because the videotapes are already considered as public property.
b. NO. Notwithstanding the non-charging of fee for the use of the videotapes, Victoria Hotel still uses the videotapes for business purposes, serving as an attraction to prospective and current guests, unless the performances in the videotapes had been long before available to the public prior to registration; hence, it is already public property. (Filipino Society of Composers, Authors, Publishers, Inc. v. Benjamin Tan, G.R. No. L-36402, March 16, 1987)
NO. In copyright infringement, intent is irrelevant. A person may consciously or unconsciously copy or infringe a copyrighted material and still be held liable for such act.
NO. Although intent is irrelevant in cases of copyright infringement, Juan had no access to Manoling’s copyrighted story because it is unpublished. Hence, he can put up independent creation as a defense being that he has no reasonable access to the unpublished copyrighted story of Manoling.
KK did not commit copyright infringement. Under the “first sale” doctrine, the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord. Hence, there is no infringement by KK since the said doctrine permitted importation and resale without the publisher’s further permission.
Pascuala did not infringe on the rights of Virtucio. The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching including limited number of copies for classroom use, scholarship, research and similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright. (Section 185 of RA 8293, as amended) In this case, Virtucio’s reproduction of the limited number of CD was for classroom use and educational purposes thus negating copyright infringement.
A letter of credit is a financial device developed by merchants as a convenient and relatively safe mode of dealing with sales of goods to satisfy the seemingly irreconcilable interests of a seller, who refuses to part with his goods before he is paid, and a buyer, who wants to have control of the goods before paying. The use of credits in commercial transactions serves to reduce the risk of nonpayment of the purchase price under the contract for the sale of goods and to reduce the risk of nonperformance of an obligation in a non-sale setting. (Transfield Philippines Inc. vs. Luzon Hydro Corp., November 22, 2004)
