Joaquin v. Drilon
NEW DOCTRINEFacts
The Antecedents: Petitioner BJ Productions, Inc. (BJPI) held Certificate of Copyright No. M922 for the dating game show Rhoda and Me, aired from 1970 to 1977. BJPI submitted an addendum specifying the show's format and style. Petitioner Francisco Joaquin, Jr., president of BJPI, saw a similar show, It's a Date, produced by IXL Productions, Inc. (IXL), and demanded its discontinuation due to copyright infringement. Procedural History: IXL sought to register its copyright for It's a Date. An information for violation of P.D. No. 49 was filed against IXL's president and officers of RPN Channel 9. Respondent Secretary of Justice Franklin M. Drilon reversed the Assistant City Prosecutor's findings, directing the dismissal of the case. Petitioner Joaquin's motion for reconsideration was denied. The Petition: Petitioners seek to annul the resolutions of the Department of Justice, contending that the Secretary gravely abused his discretion by invoking the non-presentation of the master tape as fatal to probable cause and by determining copyrightability, an issue allegedly within the exclusive jurisdiction of the regional trial court.
Issue(s)
Whether the Secretary of Justice gravely abused his discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in reversing the investigating prosecutor's finding of probable cause. Whether the Secretary of Justice gravely abused his discretion in ruling that the non-presentation of the master videotape was fatal to the existence of probable cause for copyright infringement. Whether the format or mechanics of a television show is copyrightable under P.D. No. 49, and whether the evidence presented was sufficient to establish probable cause for copyright infringement.
Ruling
The petition is dismissed. The resolutions of the Department of Justice are sustained.
Ratio Decidendi
On the Secretary of Justice's authority to review and consider unassigned errors, and determination of copyrightability: The Secretary of Justice, in reviewing resolutions of prosecutors, is not precluded from considering errors, although unassigned, for the purpose of determining whether there is probable cause for filing cases in court. He must make his own finding of probable cause and is not confined to the issues raised by the parties during the preliminary investigation. His findings are not subject to review unless shown to have been made with grave abuse of discretion. While the ultimate question of copyrightability is for the court to decide, the Secretary of Justice may make a preliminary determination of this question in resolving whether there is probable cause for filing a case. In this instance, the Secretary did not commit any grave error in making such a preliminary determination. On the necessity of presenting the master tape: The presentation of the master tape of the copyrighted work is necessary for the validity of search warrants and for establishing probable cause in copyright infringement cases. The essence of infringement lies in substantial similarity, which requires a comparison between the copyrighted work and the allegedly infringing work. Mere allegations or descriptions of formats are insufficient to establish this linkage. The ruling in 20th Century Fox Film Corporation v. Court of Appeals was clarified in Columbia Pictures, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, stating that the necessity of the master tape should be understood as a guidepost where there is doubt as to the nexus between the master tape and the copies, not an inflexible requirement in all cases. On the copyrightability of show formats and sufficiency of evidence presented: Under Section 2 of P.D. No. 49, the format or mechanics of a television show is not included in the list of works entitled to copyright protection. Copyright protection extends to finished works, such as audio-visual recordings, as enumerated in Section 2(M) of P.D. No. 49, but not to abstract ideas, concepts, formats, or schemes. This principle is reinforced by Section 175 of the Intellectual Property Code (R.A. No. 8293). The written descriptions of the formats of Rhoda and Me and It's a Date were insufficient to establish probable cause for copyright infringement. The investigating prosecutor's finding of substantial similarities in content and execution was based on these descriptions, but the Court found that the format itself is not copyrightable. Therefore, the presentation of the master videotape was indispensable to allow for a proper comparison and determination of probable cause.
Main Doctrine
The format or mechanics of a television show is not copyrightable under P.D. No. 49. Copyright protection extends only to the finished work, such as the audio-visual recordings of each episode, not to the underlying concept or format. The presentation of the master videotape is indispensable for determining probable cause in copyright infringement cases involving audio-visual works, especially when the alleged infringement pertains to the format.