Case Digest (G.R. No. 256091)
Facts:
Icebergs Food Concepts, Inc. and Allan John T. Young v. Filipino Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers, Inc., G.R. No. 256091, April 12, 2023, Supreme Court Third Division, Singh, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners Icebergs (a restaurant operator) and Young (its President and General Supervisor) were sued by respondent FILSCAP (a government-accredited Collective Management Organization) for publicly performing copyrighted musical works in Icebergs’ restaurants without a license. FILSCAP alleged monitoring from 2010–2014 established that Icebergs played about 324 songs in FILSCAP’s repertoire and that repeated demand letters (2009–2014) to secure licenses were ignored.
FILSCAP filed a Complaint for Copyright Infringement on December 1, 2014 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Quezon City, Branch 93 (Civil Case No. R‑QZN‑14‑11876‑CV). At trial Icebergs presented Young as its lone witness, who maintained that Icebergs merely tuned in to local FM radio broadcasts (a mechanical act) and did not exercise discretion to “play” particular sound recordings; Icebergs also denied charging for music or advertising songs. FILSCAP introduced monitoring reports, judicial affidavits, and fiche internationales from the CISAC database, and offered a licensing assessment prepared by its Licensing Manager.
On December 5, 2018 the RTC found Icebergs and Young liable for copyright infringement, holding that FILSCAP had authority to license public performance rights by virtue of Deeds of Assignment from members and reciprocal agreements with foreign societies, and that making recorded sounds audible in a public dining area via any device constituted a public performance. The RTC awarded compensatory damages (P627,200.00), moral and exemplary damages (P300,000.00 each), attorney’s fees (P100,000.00) and monitoring expenses, and enjoined further public performances without a FILSCAP license.
Petitioners filed a Petition for Review under Rule 43 with the Court of Appeals (CA), which the CA treated as an improper remedy (appeal from RTC in original jurisdiction should have been by notice under Rule 41) but nonetheless affirmed the RTC on the merits in a February 6, 2020 decision and denied reconsideration on March 18, 2021. The CA relied on Section 171.6 of the Intellectual Property Code (IP Code) and held it immaterial that Icebergs claimed lack of control over radio playlists; th...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did petitioners avail of the proper remedy before the Court of Appeals when they filed a Petition for Review under Rule 43 instead of an appeal under Rule 41?
- Did Icebergs commit copyright infringement by playing radio broadcasts as background music in its establishments without a license from FILSCAP, and were the damages and othe...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)