GR 222537 Zalameda (Digest)
G.R. No. 222537 , February 28, 2023
COSAC, INC., PETITIONER, VS. FILIPINO SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS AND PUBLISHERS, INC., RESPONDENT.
FACTS
This case involves a copyright infringement dispute. The petitioner, COSAC, Inc., was accused by the respondent, FILSCAP, of infringing copyrights through the performance by a live band and the playing of sound recordings in its establishment. The specific methods of playing the sound recordings were not detailed by FILSCAP nor delved into by the lower courts. The main opinion (ponencia) held COSAC liable for copyright infringement without specifying the particular economic right that was infringed.
ISSUE
The primary issue addressed in this Separate Concurring Opinion is the distinction between the economic rights of “public performance” and “other communication to the public” under the Intellectual Property Code, particularly in the context of the infringing activities alleged.
RULING
Justice Zalameda concurred with the main opinion’s finding that COSAC is liable for copyright infringement. However, he provided a detailed analysis to distinguish between the right of public performance and the right to communicate to the public. He emphasized that public performance is the broader right and includes performance by means of a recording, such as playing sound recordings in a public place like a discotheque, airplane, or shopping mall. He clarified, based on the WIPO Guide to the Berne Convention, that playing radio broadcasts through loudspeakers in a commercial establishment constitutes a new and separate public performance, not merely a reception of a broadcast. He noted that the right to “communication to the public,” as defined in the amended Intellectual Property Code, refers specifically to making works available through interactive, on-demand systems like the internet, aligning with the WIPO Internet Treaties. He concluded that the acts committed by COSAC (live band performance and playing sound recordings) fall under the right of public performance. He voted to DENY the petition and hold COSAC liable for infringement.