关于知识产权 知识产权培训 树立尊重知识产权的风尚 知识产权外联 部门知识产权 知识产权和热点议题 特定领域知识产权 专利和技术信息 商标信息 工业品外观设计信息 地理标志信息 植物品种信息(UPOV) 知识产权法律、条约和判决 知识产权资源 知识产权报告 专利保护 商标保护 工业品外观设计保护 地理标志保护 植物品种保护(UPOV) 知识产权争议解决 知识产权局业务解决方案 知识产权服务缴费 谈判与决策 发展合作 创新支持 公私伙伴关系 人工智能工具和服务 组织简介 与产权组织合作 问责制 专利 商标 工业品外观设计 地理标志 版权 商业秘密 WIPO学院 讲习班和研讨会 知识产权执法 WIPO ALERT 宣传 世界知识产权日 WIPO杂志 案例研究和成功故事 知识产权新闻 产权组织奖 企业 高校 土著人民 司法机构 遗传资源、传统知识和传统文化表现形式 经济学 金融 无形资产 性别平等 全球卫生 气候变化 竞争政策 可持续发展目标 前沿技术 移动应用 体育 旅游 PATENTSCOPE 专利分析 国际专利分类 ARDI - 研究促进创新 ASPI - 专业化专利信息 全球品牌数据库 马德里监视器 Article 6ter Express数据库 尼斯分类 维也纳分类 全球外观设计数据库 国际外观设计公报 Hague Express数据库 洛迦诺分类 Lisbon Express数据库 全球品牌数据库地理标志信息 PLUTO植物品种数据库 GENIE数据库 产权组织管理的条约 WIPO Lex - 知识产权法律、条约和判决 产权组织标准 知识产权统计 WIPO Pearl(术语) 产权组织出版物 国家知识产权概况 产权组织知识中心 产权组织技术趋势 全球创新指数 世界知识产权报告 PCT - 国际专利体系 ePCT 布达佩斯 - 国际微生物保藏体系 马德里 - 国际商标体系 eMadrid 第六条之三(徽章、旗帜、国徽) 海牙 - 国际外观设计体系 eHague 里斯本 - 国际地理标志体系 eLisbon UPOV PRISMA UPOV e-PVP Administration UPOV e-PVP DUS Exchange 调解 仲裁 专家裁决 域名争议 检索和审查集中式接入(CASE) 数字查询服务(DAS) WIPO Pay 产权组织往来账户 产权组织各大会 常设委员会 会议日历 WIPO Webcast 产权组织正式文件 发展议程 技术援助 知识产权培训机构 COVID-19支持 国家知识产权战略 政策和立法咨询 合作枢纽 技术与创新支持中心(TISC) 技术转移 发明人援助计划(IAP) WIPO GREEN 产权组织的PAT-INFORMED 无障碍图书联合会 产权组织服务创作者 WIPO Translate 语音转文字 分类助手 成员国 观察员 总干事 部门活动 驻外办事处 职位空缺 采购 成果和预算 财务报告 监督
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
法律 条约 判决 按管辖区浏览

斯里兰卡

LK001-j

返回

2024 WIPO IP Judges Forum Informal Case Summary – Supreme Court of Sri Lanka [2021]: Dharmapala v Officer-in-Charge, Colombo Special Crimes Division, SC Appeal No. 155/14

This is an informal case summary prepared for the purposes of facilitating exchange during the 2024 WIPO IP Judges Forum.

 

Session 5

 

Supreme Court of Sri Lanka [2021]: Dharmapala v Officer-in-Charge, Colombo Special Crimes Division, SC Appeal No. 155/14

 

Date of judgment: June 28, 2021

Issuing authority: Supreme Court

Level of the issuing authority: Final Instance

Type of procedure: Judicial (Criminal)

Subject matter: Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights)

Plaintiff: Mananage Susil Dharmapala

Defendant: Officer-in-Charge, Colombo Special Crimes Division

Keywords: infringement, pirated copies, audio-visual works, evidence

 

Basic facts: The Officer-in-Charge, Colombo Special Crimes Division (Respondent) instituted criminal proceedings against Mananage Susil Dharmapala (Appellant) in the Magistrate’s Court of Maligakanda for unlawfully reproducing and distributing copies (CDs) of a music record titled “Galana Gangaki Jeewithe.” The record, which includes 15 songs, features the tracks ‘Yowun Wasanthe’ and ‘Onna Ekomath’, which were components of the films ‘Diyamanthi’ and ‘Saradiyelge Putha’, and which are owned by Professor Sunil Ariyaratne. The song "Onna Ekoomath Eka" was co-owned by the artist Mirihana Aarachchige Nanda Malini. This was considered an offense under Section 178(2) of the Intellectual Property Act, No.36 of 2003.

 

The Magistrate’s Cout found Dharmapala guilty of the charges under Section 178(2) of the Intellectual Property Act. In appeal, the High Court of the Western Province affirmed the conviction and dismissed the appeal. The Appellant requested a Special Leave to Appeal on the basis of the High Court erring in law since the prosecution did not provide evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court granted the request for Special Leave to Appeal.

 

Held: The Supreme Court held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt the actus reus of the offense, namely that the Appellant had in his possession for sale a compact disk titled ‘Galana Gangaki Jeewithe’ which contained copies of songs ‘Yowun Wasanthe’ and ‘Onna Ekomath’ of which the copyrights were vested with Professor Sunil Ariyaratne and Visharadha Nanda Malini. Such copies had been made in infringement of the rights protected under Part II of the Act.

 

The Supreme Court also held that an irresistible and inescapable inference arises that the Appellant knew or certainly had reason to believe that the compact disk contained copies of the songs in question. Thus, the prosecution discharged its burden of proving beyond reasonable doubt that the Appellant entertained the required mens rea of the offense contained in section 178(2) of the Intellectual Property Act.

 

Relevant holdings in relation to Copyright: The Intellectual Property Act recognizes that any original intellectual creation in the literary, artistic, or scientific domain qualifies as a "work" and is protected by copyright law. Specifically, original songs and audio-visual works fall within this protection. The Act grants authors both economic rights, such as the exclusive right to reproduce and distribute their works, and moral rights, which ensure their names are prominently displayed on copies of the work, regardless of who holds the economic rights. These protections apply automatically upon the creation of the work, irrespective of the medium or purpose of the work. Exceptions to copyright protection, such as fair use, are narrowly defined and do not apply broadly to all forms of reproduction or distribution.

 

When a song is incorporated into an audio-visual work like a film, the film's producer generally gains the economic rights to the entire work, including the song. This means that the original creators, such as the lyricist and music composer, typically lose their economic rights unless otherwise agreed. However, they retain their moral rights to the original song. The unauthorized reproduction or distribution of such works, including songs and films, is prohibited under the IP Act, and any breach of these rights constitutes an offense. This includes making unauthorized copies, selling, or even possessing such pirated copies for trade purposes. The law prohibits these activities to protect the economic and moral rights of creators, ensuring that their works are not exploited without permission.

 

                                                                                      

Relevant legislation:

·       Intellectual Property Act, No.36 of 2003

·       Code of Criminal Procedure Act