"Two Butterfly" and other MTV serious infringement

Popular song "Two Butterfly" music television, many people have read, but its copyright belongs to who, may few people know. Yesterday Yuexiu court hearing the copyright dispute involving the song, China Audio and video Copyright Group Management Association (abbreviation: Sound Association) to sue the sale of Song machine merchants infringement.

The Voice association said that the association has five music TV works including "Two Butterflies", reproduction rights and distribution rights on the computer accompaniment machine, but the jukebox used these works without authorization. The defendant's agent retorted that the concepts of the works and the audio-visual products were different, and that the association had the right to reproduce and issue.

The M TV in the jukebox is suspected of infringement.

Yesterday morning, the plaintiff, the accused both sides only deputy lawyers to appear, because the case in Guangdong area has no precedents, causing a lot of media attention.

Sound Association lawyer said that May 27 and June 4 this year, the Sound association staff in Guangdong Province Guangzhou Yuexiu District Tai Sha Tau Four Road, 8th Gold Sea Printing Electrical Appliance Plaza, two, a 6-15 investigation found that the shop sales of the jukebox, there are infringement of the sound of the rights and interests of the works. The staff purchased the jukebox and asked for a receipt, and went to the notary office for a notarized seizure.

In the court, the Voice of the association lawyers to show the seizure of the jukebox, and said that the audio Association to trust the way from the copyright owner Beijing Bird Art Promotion Co., Ltd. (abbreviation: Bird Company exclusive, made the "Two Butterfly", "You Are my Rose" and other five pieces of music, in the Chinese mainland region, in the computer backup machine (Kara o K equipment) in the field of reproduction rights, distribution rights, in the defendant sold the song machine used these works, the association has the right to sue in its own name to the users of the infringement.

In addition to the sale of the jukebox business as a defendant, the association also sued the Golden Sea printing electrical Appliances City management, the lessor. The plaintiff filed a total of four claims, includes: the defendant immediately ceased to the plaintiff management of the works of reproduction rights, distribution rights infringement, no longer copy, issue the work involved; the defendant made a public apology to the plaintiff in a statement issued in a local newspaper; the defendant compensated the plaintiff for the economic loss of 10,000 yuan, investigated, The charges are 6,000 RMB and the defendant bears all the costs of the lawsuit.

The defendant's attorney immediately stated that he disagreed with all requests for appeal.

Users download M TV does not belong to infringement

For the Big K TV in Guangzhou, the tune Association is no stranger. After the establishment of the association, we intend to collect royalties from the K-Hall in China, especially because of the refusal of Guangzhou K-Hall. After three years of negotiations, until last July, some Guangzhou K Hall and the Music Association reached an acceptable preliminary agreement, the price of the payment of royalties due to trade secrets, has been not known to outsiders.

"This lawsuit is not the same as before, the controversy lies in the right to play, this time is the right to copy, distribution, from the source." "said the plaintiff's lawyer.

Yesterday, the reporter asked if a netizen from the Internet to download a song "Two Butterfly" music television, this infringement? The plaintiff's lawyer said that it was a reasonable act to enjoy it at home without making a profit. But if broadcast in public, it is a tort. Reporter Sheng Correspondent Yue Fa Xuan

Focus

Does the Association have the right of reproduction and distribution

The plaintiff's solicitor first presented the evidence and produced a CD-ROM of the music TV works of "Two Butterflies", as well as a copy of a letter of authorization with the bird Company agreement. "These can prove that we have the right to reproduce and issue these music works." ”

But the defendant, acting as a lawyer, said the association only signed an authorization agreement with the producer of the music television, but did not sign an agreement with the publisher and issuer on the CD, whether the music television is a work or the audio-video is disputed, "We believe that the music television involved in the latter, the producers do not enjoy full copyright." "The defendant's attorney said that it was not possible to confirm that the association had the right to reproduce and issue rights."

The plaintiff's lawyer immediately retorted that the producer was original and enjoyed complete copyright in the filming of music and television. The publishers and distributors displayed on the CD-ROM are only one of the current needs of marketing. Therefore, the Music Association and the production party signed an authorization agreement, they should enjoy the right to copy, distribution.

Is it the manufacturer or the seller?

The plaintiff's lawyer said that the defendant sold the song machine without permission, copying the music television involved in the crime, is a tort.

The defendant's lawyer said in court, as the sale of Song Machine merchants, did not participate in the reproduction, distribution behavior, but in April this year to a manufacturer order, the purchase method is "first pay, after arrival", therefore, the sale of the song Machine is not a tort behavior. "The plaintiff should sue the manufacturer, not us." ”

Plaintiff lawyer retort, because the song machine did not label manufacturer name, address, there is no product certification, is not a legitimate source, is a typical "three without" products, so the plaintiff that the song Machine Music TV works is the accused copy. Coupled with the song machine broadcast music television, the effect is poor, infringement of the rights and interests of the sound association.