ABS-CBN v.

Gozon
GR No. 195956
Facts
ABS-CBN aired the arrival of Angelo dela Cruz in NAIA, an OFW kidnapped by
Iraqi militants, in exchange for the demand of withdrawing Filipino troops in
Iraq. ABS-CBN took video footages of the said arrival, and held a press
conference thereafter. ABS-CBN allowed Reuters Television Service to use
such video footages it had taken under a Special Embargo Agreement, which
prohibits the use of such footages by local media outlets.
GMA stationed its reporters likewise in NAIA. It received live video feed from
Reuters because GMA was also a subscriber of the latter. It immediately
broadcasted it in a flash report together with the live broadcast.
It therefore paved way for ABS-CBN to file a complaint for copyright
infringement due to the use of the live video feed.
The information filed by the prosecutor was challenged by GMA before the
Secretary of Justice, arguing, among others that good faith is a defense.
Petitioners moved for reconsideration which was granted.
Respondents challenged the said resolution before the Court of Appeals which
reversed the resolution. The court of appeals ruled that while the footage is
copyrightable, the fact that GMA was not aware of the special agreement of
ABS-CBN and Reuters makes them not liable for infringement. Hence, the
petition before the Supreme Court.
Issues
1. Is the footage copyrightable?
2. Is good faith a defense in infringement?
Ruling
1. Yes.
Broadcasting organizations are entitled to several rights and to the pro
tection of these rights under the Intellectual Property Code.
Respondents’ argument that the subject news footage is not copyright
able is erroneous.
Surely, private respondent has a copyright of its news coverage. Seem
ingly, for airing said video feed, petitioner GMA is liable under the prov
isions of the Intellectual Property Code, which was enacted purposely t
o protect copyright owners from infringement.
News as expressed in a video footage is entitled to copyright protectio
 n. Broadcasting organizations have not only copyright on but also neig
hboring rights over their broadcasts. Copyrightability of a work is differ
ent from fair use of a work for purposes of news reporting.
2. No.
Infringement under the Intellectual Property Code is malum
prohibitum. The Intellectual Property Code is a special law. Copyright i
s a statutory creation: Copyright, in the strict sense of the term, is pur
ely a statutory right. It is a new or independent right granted by the st
atute, and not simply a preexisting right regulated by the statute. Bein
g a statutory grant, the rights are only such as the statute confers, an
d may be obtained and enjoyed only with respect to the subjects and b
y the persons, and on terms and conditons specified in the statute.
The general rule is that acts punished under a special law are malum
prohibitum. “An act which is declared malum
prohibitum, malice or criminal intent is completely immaterial.”
Unlike other jurisdictions that require intent for a criminal prosecution
of copyright infringement, the Philippines does not statutorily support
good faith asa defense. Other jurisdictions provide in their intellectual
property codes or relevant laws that mensrea, whether express or impl
ied, is an element of criminal copyright infringement.