Result of Copyright Infringement Lawsuit Initiated by Laiho Culture Foundation & Museum against Two Taiwanese Companies

Laiho Culture Foundation & Museum pressed charge against United Digital Publications Co. (hereinafter “United Digital”) and Greatman Management Consulting Inc. (hereinafter “Greatman”) for infringing upon the copyrights of Lai Ho’s works.  The IP Court rendered a judgment in the second instance reversing the first instance judgment to the effect that United Digital and Greatman do not violate Taiwan Copyright Act but should pay TWD300,000 in damages.

Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum acquires, collects and preserves full collections of books, calligraphy and paintings, manuscripts, relevant documents, and things left or owned by Lai Ho, the father of the new Taiwanese literature.  Having spent ten years and more than TWD16,000,000, Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum published a series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts in year 2000, a result of much time and manpower and efforts taken by Prof. LIN Rui-Ming of National Cheng Kung University and descendant of Lai Ho, LAI Yue-Yun who had been jointly compiling the things and remains left by Lai Ho.  United Digital and Greatman, however, without due authorization from Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum, included the series into their database of the “Continuation of Taiwan Literature Series” by way of scanning and reproduction, for their registered online members’ downloading or purchasing on a fee-charging basis to gain profits, and accordingly infringed upon the copyrights held by Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum.

According to the IP Court judgment, the series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts are not eligible for copyright protection as opposed to that defined in Article 7 of Taiwan Copyright Act providing that a compilation work which is formed by the creative selection “and” arrangement of materials is eligible for copyright protection.  The IP Court held that the compilers of the said series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts fail to show their subjectively spiritual, intelligent, cultural, and creative representations in the selection of materials.  That is to say, Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum and Prof. LIN Rui-Ming did not present how they selected these collected materials in a unique way and perspective.  Further, even if the arrangement of materials of the said series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts indeed show these collected materials in a unique way, the series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts do not form a compilation work that is eligible for copyright protection. 

In addition, plate right shall subsist for a period of ten years beginning from the time the plate is completed and is subject to a registration basis.  Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum and Prof. LIN Rui-Ming did not complete registration for the said series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts.  Considering the investment gains that should arise from the said series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts as a result of much time and manpower put therein by Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum and Prof. LIN Rui-Ming, the IP Court decided that Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum and Prof. LIN Rui-Ming deserve protection at least for their legal interests, not legal rights, while their legal interests should never go beyond the scope of the statutory plate right.  Therefore, the IP Court determined that the protection for their legal interests should expire on December 31, 2010, instead of indefinitely. 

In judgment, the IP Court also stated that United Digital and Greatman should pay to Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum the compensation of TWD300,000 on the ground that as professional database service providers, United Digital’s and Greatman’s act of reproducing all the said series of image collections of Lai Ho’s manuscripts without due authorization obviously goes against the national moral ideas, transaction practices, and commercial ethics, and therefore violates Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum’s interests and causes damages to another by way contrary to good morals.  The case is appellable if Lai Ho Culture Foundation & Museum disagrees with the IP Court judgment. (August 2014)
/CCS