Public Prosecutor v. Poh Kim Video: Copyright Infringement under Copyright Act
In Public Prosecutor v. Poh Kim Video Pte Ltd, the High Court of Singapore heard an appeal by TS Laser against the sentence imposed on Poh Kim Video for five offences under s 136(2) of the Copyright Act. Poh Kim Video was found to have sold infringing copies of the Korean drama series 'Bad Friends'. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the magistrate's decision to fine Poh Kim Video $2,000 per charge, totaling $10,000. The court considered the magistrate's interpretation of 'article' under the Copyright Act and mitigating factors in sentencing.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Poh Kim Video was charged with copyright infringement for selling infringing copies of a Korean drama series. The court dismissed the appeal against the sentence.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Appellant | Government Agency | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | Oommen Mathew, Serena Howe |
| Poh Kim Video Pte Ltd | Respondent | Corporation | Fine of $10,000 Upheld | Partial | Kirpal Singh |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Kirpal Singh | Kirpal and Associates |
| Oommen Mathew | Tan Peng Chin LLC |
| Serena Howe | Tan Peng Chin LLC |
4. Facts
- Poh Kim Video engaged in the sale of video cassettes, compact discs, laser discs, VCDs and DVDs.
- TS Laser instructed private investigators to conduct trap purchases of a Korean drama series from Poh Kim Video.
- Five charges were preferred against Poh Kim Video for breaches under s 136(2)(a) of the Copyright Act.
- The prosecution's case was that the copyright in the drama series was owned by MBC Production Co Pte Ltd.
- MBC granted Hwa Yae Multimedia International Trading Company the sole and exclusive rights in the series for Singapore.
- Hwa Yae sub-licensed these rights to TS Laser.
- Poh Kim Video's defence was that the box sets were legitimate parallel imports from Hong Kong.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Poh Kim Video Pte Ltd, MA 80/2003, [2003] SGHC 304
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Poh Kim Corporation allegedly acquired rights for the Hong Kong region from YSY Digital Entertainment Company Limited. | |
| Hwa Yae Multimedia International Trading Company granted sole and exclusive rights in the series for the territory of Singapore to TS Laser. | |
| Poh Kim Video started selling box sets of the drama series at their outlets. | |
| Private investigators conducted trap purchases of the drama series from Poh Kim Video. | |
| Phoenix Satellite Television Co Limited licence period commenced for the Hong Kong region. | |
| High Court dismissed the appeal. |
7. Legal Issues
- Copyright Infringement
- Outcome: The court found that Poh Kim Video had infringed copyright by selling infringing copies of the drama series.
- Category: Substantive
- Sentencing
- Outcome: The court upheld the magistrate's sentence, finding that it was not manifestly inadequate.
- Category: Procedural
- Definition of 'article' under s 136(2) Copyright Act
- Outcome: The court held that a box set of a single drama series could be regarded as an 'article' for the purposes of sentencing.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Fine
9. Cause of Actions
- Copyright Infringement
10. Practice Areas
- Copyright Infringement
11. Industries
- Media
- Retail
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zeng Guoyuan v PP | High Court | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR 321 | Singapore | Cited regarding the principle that an accused is entitled to raise any type of defence necessary to his case, even if this defence is scandalous or vexatious in nature. |
| Ahmad Shah bin Hashim v PP | Unknown | Yes | [1980] 1 MLJ 77 | Malaysia | Cited regarding the principle that an accused person is entitled to put up any type of defence that he thinks necessary and justified in order to raise a reasonable doubt in the prosecution case. |
| Highway Video Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2002] 1 SLR 129 | Singapore | Cited regarding the burden on the prosecution to prove that an imported article which is alleged to be an infringing article is not a legitimate parallel import. |
| Lim Tai Wah v Highway Video Pte Ltd | Magistrate Court | Yes | MC, PSS 162/2001 | Singapore | Cited to support the submission that offenders have consistently been sentenced in relation to the number of infringing VCDs and not the number of box sets. |
| Cherng Chiu Yung v Rahman bin Haji Omar | Unknown | Yes | MA16/97/01 | Singapore | Cited regarding the range of sentences imposed in offences under s 136(2) of the Copyright Act. |
| PP v Chew Alleng | Unknown | Yes | MA 248/1993/02 | Singapore | Cited regarding the range of sentences imposed in offences under s 136(2) of the Copyright Act. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Copyright Act
- Copyright Infringement
- VCDs
- Parallel Import
- Infringing Copies
- Article
- Box Set
- Korean Drama Series
- Trap Purchases
15.2 Keywords
- Copyright
- Infringement
- VCD
- Poh Kim Video
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
16. Subjects
- Copyright
- Criminal Law
- Sentencing
17. Areas of Law
- Copyright Law
- Criminal Law
- Criminal Procedure and Sentencing