Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
166337 March 7, 2005 * RTC- came out with an order denying Bayanihan's prayer as plaintiff has not been
Bayanihan Music Philippines, Inc. vs. BMG Records (Pilipinas) and Jose Mari able to show its entitlement to the relief TRO and writ of preliminary
Chan injunction in its verified complaint for
- denied the motion for reconsideration.
* Jose Mari Chan- on July 16, 1973, entered into a contract with Bayanihan * Court of Appeals- denied the petition for certiorari finding neither flaw of
whereunder he assigned to the latter all his rights, interests and participation jurisdiction nor taint of grave abuse of discretion in the issuance of the
over his musical composition "Can We Just Stop and Talk A While." assailed orders.
- on March 11, 1976, entered into a similar contract over his other musical
composition entitled "Afraid for Love to Fade." ISSUE: W/N Bayanihan has a right that may entitle it to the issuance of a TRO
* Bayanihan- on the strength of the abovementioned contracts, applied for and was or writ of preliminary injunction.
granted by the National Library a Certificate of Copyright Registration
for each of the two musical compositions dated: * The requisites for the issuance of an injunctive writ are:
(1) November 19, 1973- Can We Just Stop and Talk A While (1) there must be a right in esse or the existence of a right to be protected;
(2) May 21, 1980- Afraid for Love to Fade (2) the act against which the injunction is to be directed is a violation of such
* Chan- without the knowledge and consent of Bayanihan, authorized BMG right.
Records to record and distribute the aforementioned musical compositions * While a clear showing of the right to an injunctive writ is necessary albeit its
in a then recently released album of singer Lea Salonga. existence need not be conclusively established, still, for Bayanihan to be entitled to
* Bayanihan- informed Chan and BMG of its existing copyrights over the subject the writ, he is required to show that he has the ostensible right to the final relief
musical compositions and the alleged violation of such right by the two. prayed for in its complaint. cralaw Here, the trial court did not find ample
- since no settlement was reached by the parties, filed with the RTC-QC a justifications for the issuance of the writ prayed for by petitioner.
complaint against Chan and BMG for violation of Section 216 of Republic
Act No. 8293, with a prayer for the issuance of TRO and/or writ of * Chan, being undeniably the composer and author of the lyrics of the two (2) songs,
preliminary injunction, enjoining BMG from further recording and is protected by the mere fact alone that he is the creator thereof, conformably with
distributing the subject musical compositions in whatever form of musical R.A. No. 8293, Section 172.2 of which reads:
products, and Chan from further granting any authority to record and “Works are protected by the sole fact of their creation, irrespective of their
distribute the same musical compositions. mode or form of expression, as well as of their content, quality and purpose.”
* BMG- contended that:
(1) the acts of recording and publication sought to be enjoined had already * An examination of petitioner's verified complaint yields a lingering doubt on
been consummated, thereby rendering moot Bayanihan's prayer for TRO whether there is or there is no such right.
and/or preliminary injunction; and * The two contracts contain the following identical stipulations:
(2) there is no clear showing that Bayanihan would be greatly damaged by 7. It is also hereby agreed to by the parties herein that in the event the
the refusal of the prayed for TRO and/or preliminary injunction. PUBLISHER [Bayanihan] fails to use in any manner whatsoever within two (2)
* Chan- filed his answer alleging that: years any of the compositions covered by this contract, then such composition may
(1) it was never his intention to divest himself of all his rights and interest be released in favor of the WRITER and excluded from this contract and the
over the musical compositions in question; PUBLISHER shall execute the necessary release in writing in favor of the WRITER
(2) the contracts he entered into with Bayanihan are mere music publication upon request of the WRITER;
agreements giving Bayanihan, as assignee, the power to administer his * It would thus appear that the two (2) contracts expired on October 1, 1975 and
copyright over his two songs and to act as the exclusive publisher thereof; March 11, 1978, respectively, there being neither an allegation, much less proof,
(3) he was not cognizant of the application made by and the subsequent grant that petitioner Bayanihan ever made use of the compositions within the two-year
of copyrights to Bayanihan; and period agreed upon by the parties.
(4) Bayanihan was remissed in its obligations under the contracts because * The copyrights obtained by Bayanihan are not presumed to subsist in accordance
it failed to effectively advertise his musical compositions for almost twenty with Section 218.2 [a] and [b], of the Intellectual Property Code, because respondent
(20) years, hence, he caused the rescission of said contracts in 1997. Chan had put in issue the existence thereof. Sec. 218.2. [a] and [b] provides that in
an action for infringement:
[a] Copyright shall be presumed to subsist in the work or other subject matter to
which the action relates if the defendant does not put in issue the question whether copyright
subsists in the work or other subject matter.
[b] Where the subsistence of the copyright is established, the plaintiff shall be
presumed to be the owner of the copyright of he claims to be the owner of the copyright and
the defendant does not put in issue the question of his ownership.
* It is noted that Chan revoked and terminated said contracts, along with others, on
July 30, 1997 or almost 3 years before petitioner filed its complaint on August 8,
2000. By then, it would appear that petitioner had no more right that is protectable
by injunction.