Professional Documents
Culture Documents
vs Franklin
Drilon
302 SCRA 225 Mercantile Law Intellectual Property Law on
Copyright Game Show Ideas and Concepts Not Covered by
Copyright Presentation of the Master Tape
BJ Productions Inc. (BJPI) was the holder of copyright over the show
Rhoda and Me. It holds rights over the shows format and style of
presentation. In 1991, BJPIs president Francisco Joaquin saw on TV
RPN 9s show Its a Date, a show which is basically the same as
Rhoda and Me. He eventually sued Gabriel Zosa, the manager of the
show Its a Date. The investigating prosecutor found probable cause
against Zosa. Zosa later sought a review of the prosecutors resolution
before the Secretary of Justice (Franklin Drilon). Drilon reversed the
findings of the fiscal and directed him to dismiss the case against Zosa.
ISSUE: Whether or not the orderof Drilon finding no probable cause
is valid.
HELD: Yes. The essence of copyright infringement is the copying, in
whole or in part, of copyrightable materials as defined and
enumerated in Section 2 of PD. No. 49 (Copyright Law).Apart from
the manner in which it is actually expressed, however, the idea of a
dating game show is a non-copyrightable material. Ideas, concepts,
formats, or schemes in their abstract form clearly do not fall
within the class of works or materials susceptible of
copyright registration as provided in PD. No. 49.What is covered
by BJPIs copyright is the specific episodes of the show Rhoda and Me.
Further, BJPI should have presented the master videotape of the show
in order to show the linkage between the copyright show (Rhoda and
Me) and the infringing show (Its a Date). This is based on the ruling
in 20th Century Fox vs CA (though this has been qualified by Columbia
Pictures vs CA, this is still good law). Though BJPI did provide a lot of
written evidence and description to show the linkage between the
shows, the same were not enough. A television show includes more
than mere words can describe because it involves a whole spectrum of
visuals and effects, video and audio, such that no similarity or
dissimilarity may be found by merely describing the general
copyright/format of both dating game shows.
On the other hand, Robles contends that the book DEP is the product
of her own intellectual creation, and was not a copy of any existing
valid copyrighted book and that the similarities may be due to the
authors' exercise of the "right to fair use of copyrighted materials, as
guides."
The trial court ruled in favor of the respondents, absolving them of any
liability. Later, the Court of Appeals rendered judgment in favor of
respondents Robles and Goodwill Trading Co., Inc. In this appeal,
petitioners submit that the appellate court erred in affirming the trial
court's decision.
Held: A perusal of the records yields several pages of the book DEP
that are similar if not identical with the text of CET. The court finds
that respondent Robles' act of lifting from the book of petitioners
substantial portions of discussions and examples, and her failure to
acknowledge the same in her book is an infringement of petitioners'
copyrights.
In the case at bar, the least that respondent Robles could have done
was to acknowledge petitioners Habana et. al. as the source of the
portions of DEP. The final product of an author's toil is her book. To
allow another to copy the book without appropriate acknowledgment
is injury enough.
FACTS:
ISSUE: