Title
Supreme Court
Cosac, Inc. vs. Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Inc.
Case
G.R. No. 222537
Decision Date
Feb 28, 2023
FILSCAP sued COSAC for copyright infringement after Off the Grill played licensed music without authorization. Courts ruled COSAC liable, ordering payment of damages and royalties.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 257446)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Representation
    • Petitioner: COSAC, Inc., owner‐operator of Off the Grill Bar and Restaurant in Quezon City.
    • Respondent: Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Inc. (FILSCAP), a non-stock, non-profit collective management organization authorized to license and enforce public performance rights of musical works.
  • Events Leading to Litigation
    • Monitoring (Feb. 3, 2005 & Jan. 13, 2006): FILSCAP agents observed Off the Grill playing live and recorded music from its repertoire without a license.
    • Demand Letters: FILSCAP sent letters (Sept. 20 & Oct. 14, 2004) and a final demand (Nov. 10, 2005) instructing COSAC to secure licenses and pay royalties.
    • Filing of Complaint (Feb. 13, 2006): FILSCAP sued COSAC for copyright infringement, unpaid license fees/royalties, damages, attorney’s fees, and litigation expenses.
    • COSAC’s Defense and Counterclaim: Denied infringement and assailed FILSCAP’s standing; argued that music becomes public upon broadcast and questioned authority to collect fees.
    • Evidence Presented by FILSCAP:
      • Deeds of assignment from local authors and reciprocal agreements with foreign societies.
      • Certificate of Authentication and ICSAC certification confirming FILSCAP’s status.
      • Fiche Internationale database listing assigned works.
      • Judicial affidavits of FILSCAP agents cataloguing 25 live-performed and 22 mechanically played songs.
      • Fee matrix based on seating capacity to compute royalties.
  • Procedural History
    • RTC Decision (Oct. 24, 2012): Found infringement; awarded PHP 317,050.00 in unpaid royalties, PHP 5,778.17 for monitoring expenses, interest, PHP 52,003.47 attorney’s fees, and costs.
    • RTC Order (July 22, 2013): Denied COSAC’s motions for reconsideration.
    • CA Decision (May 28, 2015): Affirmed RTC but deleted monitoring expenses; denied COSAC’s counterclaim.
    • CA Resolution (Jan. 14, 2016): Denied reconsideration.
    • SC Petition: COSAC appealed via Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45.

Issues:

  • Did COSAC infringe FILSCAP’s exclusive public performance rights under the Intellectual Property Code?
  • Must COSAC pay unpaid license fees/royalties, damages, and attorney’s fees?
  • Is publication in the IPO Gazette required to validate FILSCAP’s deeds of assignment/reciprocal agreements?
  • Is FILSCAP a real party‐in‐interest with standing to sue?
  • Is COSAC entitled to its counterclaims for attorney’s fees and litigation expenses?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.