Dootson Investment Corporation and Another v Highway Video Pte Ltd and Another Action
| Court | High Court (Singapore) |
| Judgment Date | 28 November 1997 |
| Docket Number | Suits Nos 196 and 199 of 1994 |
| Date | 28 November 1997 |
[1997] SGHC 314
G P Selvam J
Suits Nos 196 and 199 of 1994
High Court
Copyright–Damages–Assessment of damages at large–Possessing pirated copies of laserdiscs for sale and rental–Whether award limited to lost profits–Factors to be considered
The plaintiffs claimed damages against the defendant for infringement of the copyright on certain Chinese films. In each of the two cases of infringement, the defendant was held liable for having in its possession pirated copies of the laserdiscs for sale and rental. The inquiry before the court was on the basis and amount of damages to be awarded.
Held, awarding damages of $12,500 in each case:
(1) Copyright infringement cases were analogous to tort cases where damages were at large. The facts and circumstances to be reckoned with in assessing damages depended on the facts of the case and would not be the same as those in defamation cases. Although the award was not limited to the pecuniary loss that could be specifically proved, loss of profits which could have been proved was one of the matters to be taken into account and in many cases might well have been the decisive fact: at [8] and [11].
(2) Given that the defendant had conceded that damages were at large, the court was not confined to profits lost on the number of pirated copies in the defendant's possession. Damages of $12,500 were awarded in each case of infringement bearing in mind: the snowball effect on the damage done by pirated copies, the maximum fine for the offence of possession of pirated laserdiscs for rental or sale under the Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1988 Rev Ed), the market value of the laserdiscs, and the fact that those who sell pirated laserdiscs did not keep all their stock at their retail outlet: at [13] to [16].
Cassell & Co Ltd v Broome [1972] AC 1027 (refd)
McCarey v Associated Newspapers Ltd (No 2) [1965] 2 QB 86 (refd)
Ong Seow Pheng v Lotus Development Corp [1997] 2 SLR (R) 113; [1997] 3 SLR 137 (refd)
Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129 (refd)
Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1988 Rev Ed)
Alex Thian Phin Hock and Lee Kuan Choon (Yeo Wu & Thian) for the plaintiffs
Yee Kwok Hon (Bih Li & Lee) for the defendant.
Damages for infringement of copyright
1 In these two actions the plaintiffs claimed, inter alia, damages for infringement of Chinese cinematograph in the form of laserdiscs produced in Hong Kong. In Suit No 196/94 the motion picture was “The Black Panther Warrior”. In Suit No 199/94 it was “The Tai-Chi Master”.
2 In each case the defendants were held liable in damages for having in their possession at their retail outlet in Singapore pirated copies of the laserdiscs for sale and rental. No criminal proceedings had been brought against them under the Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1988 Ed).
3 The number of copies proved to have been in the possession of each defendant was not large. I gave interlocutory judgment with an order for inquiry as to damages.
4 After hearing arguments I awarded damages in each case $12,500. The defendants have appealed against the decision on damages. I shall now set out my grounds for the award of damages.
Piracy does not pay
5 Halsbury's Laws of England vol 9 (Butterworths, 4th Ed) at p 612, “Copyright”, gives a succinct summary of applicable principles:
Damages for infringement.In an action for infringement of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Li Siu Lun v Looi Kok Poh and another
...context of proof of quantum. I begin with a local case. GP Selvam J in Dootson Investment Corporation & Anor v Highway Video Pte Ltd [1997] 3 SLR(R) 823 (“Dootson”) held that the principle of damages at large (in a tort where it is applicable) would extend to the assessment of damages. Quot......
-
Li Siu Lun v Looi Kok Poh and another
...context of proof of quantum. I begin with a local case. GP Selvam J in Dootson Investment Corporation & Anor v Highway Video Pte Ltd [1997] 3 SLR(R) 823 (“Dootson”) held that the principle of damages at large (in a tort where it is applicable) would extend to the assessment of damages. Quot......
-
Highway Video Pte Ltd v Lim Tai Wah; Teng Yock Poh v Lim Tai Wah; Teng Kem Hong v Lim Tai Wah
...Apart from a civil copyright infringement by Highway Video Pte Ltd reported in Dootson Investment Corporation v. Highway Video Pte Ltd [1998] 1 SLR 497, Mr Wong informed me that all the respondents did not have any criminal antecedents. I made it clear that for sentencing purposes, I would ......
-
Creative Technology Ltd v Cosmos Trade-Nology Pte Ltd and Another
...in this regard to cite the decision of GP Selvam J (as he then was) in Dootson Investment Corporation & Anor v Highway Video Pte Ltd [1998] 1 SLR 497, 499, 501. Quoting the learned authors of McGregor on Damages, the learned judge In certain cases general damages may be awarded in the sense......
-
ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES
...(Malaysia) Sdn Bhd v The Monarch Beverage Co (Europe) Ltd[2010] 1 SLR 1212 at [55]. In Dootson Investment Corp v Highway Video Pte Ltd[1997] 3 SLR(R) 823, G P Selvam J held that, in relation to copyright infringement, damages were “at large”, although loss of profits that could be proved by......
-
Tort Law
...the court should refer to ‘the yardstick of the reasonable man’: at [45], citing Dootson Investment Corp v Highway Video Pte Ltd[1997] 3 SLR(R) 823 at [7], per G P Selvam J. Belinda Ang Saw Ean J also stated that this approach was consistent with ‘common sense to achieve justice, not only t......