G.R. No. 96597-99 and G.R. No. 97156, October 6, 1994
Columbia Pictures, Inc., et al., petitioners, vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, Tube Video Enterprises, et al., respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners, major motion picture companies, through the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), filed applications for search warrants against private respondents, who were video rental and retail businesses, for alleged violation of Presidential Decree No. 49 (The Intellectual Property Decree). The applications alleged that respondents were in possession of pirated video tapes of copyrighted films, along with business paraphernalia and equipment used in their unlawful videogram activities. After conducting a joint hearing and examining the applicant and witnesses, the Regional Trial Court of Pasig issued Search Warrants Nos. 95, 96, and 97.
Private respondents moved to quash the search warrants, raising several grounds including lack of probable cause, the NBI’s alleged lack of authority to initiate the action, and the failure to sufficiently establish the petitioners’ ownership of the copyrighted films. The trial court denied the motions to quash. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s orders and quashed the search warrants, primarily on the ground of absence of probable cause. The appellate court found that the applicant failed to present the master tapes of the copyrighted films to the issuing judge for comparison with the allegedly pirated tapes purchased during the buy-bust operation.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in ruling that there was no probable cause for the issuance of the search warrants due to the failure to present the master tapes of the copyrighted films to the issuing judge.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petitions and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the essence of copyright infringement is the similarity, or at least substantial similarity, of the pirated works to the copyrighted work. To establish probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant in copyright infringement cases, the applicant must present the copyrighted films to the judge to allow a comparison with the purchased evidence of the allegedly pirated tapes. This linkage is necessary to determine if the seized items are unauthorized reproductions.
The Court rejected the petitioners’ argument that the presentation of master tapes was merely evidentiary and not required for establishing probable cause. It emphasized that the judge cannot presume that duplicate tapes were necessarily reproduced from the petitioners’ master tapes. Mere allegations of the existence of copyrighted films are insufficient. The requirement is to satisfy the issuing magistrate, through personal examination, that the items to be seized are indeed pirated copies. Since the applicant did not present the master tapes for comparison during the ex parte hearing, the issuing judge had no sufficient basis to determine the existence of probable cause that the items in respondents’ possession were infringing copies. Therefore, the search warrants were correctly quashed.