All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2023Da300436 Decided January 23, 2025 【Restitution of Unjust Enrichment】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Meaning of “commercial music records” under Article 29(2)) of the former Copyright Act (held: music records produced for the purpose of being sold in the market) [2] Time that is the standard for determining whether a music record may qualify as a “commercial music record” as referred to in Article 29(2) of the former Copyright Act (held: when the sound is fixed in the music record provided to the performer) and whether this is likewise applicable even in a case where the sound is fixed through reproduction (affirmative) Where the sound is fixed for the purpose of providing performers who intend to play music records for performance without the intent to sell, whether the music record may be viewed as a “commercial music record” as referred to in the above provision (negative) [3] In a case where Corporation A, a music copyright trust management business provider, entered into an agreement with Stock Company B and others, companies providing background music services, allowing Stock Company B and others to use the musical works managed by Corporation A for their webcasting services; Stock Company B and others then entered into a contract with Stock Company C, providing music files, holding through an agreement with music rights holders, to Stock Company C or franchise stores, operated by franchise business operators of Stock Company C, for background music services; the music files, identical to the digital music files sold in the market, were obtained from music suppliers, stored on servers, encrypted to ensure they could only be played on specific playback devices in stores, and then curated and arranged into channels; the music files in these channels were provided via webcasting to the store’s music service systems, where they were played as background music; when Corporation A sought damages or restitution for performance fees from Stock Company C for playing the music in their stores, the case holding that the music files that Stock Company C and others played in the stores were digital files obtained from Stock Company B and others, which were fixed on servers of Stock Company B and others in a computer file format, intended for the purpose of being played as background music in the stores, not for sale, which is a reproduction of the sound, digitized for the purpose of providing it via webcasting, to be used as background music for stores, not for commercial sale, specifically for those who intend to perform it as in-store music service; and, therefore, the music files do not correspond to “commercial music records” under Article 29(2) of the former Copyright Act, and the act of Stock Company C and others of playing the above music files in their stores corresponds to an infringement on Corporation A’s public performance rights; nevertheless, the lower court, which determined differently, erred and adversely affected the conclusion of judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine | |
