New Line Productions v Aglow Video: Copyright Infringement, Corporate Veil Piercing
New Line Productions, Inc and Alliance Entertainment Singapore Pte Ltd sued Aglow Video Pte Ltd, TS Laser Pte Ltd, TS Entertainment Pte Ltd, and others in the High Court of Singapore, alleging copyright infringement of the films "Lord of the Rings – The Two Towers", "Final Destination 2", and "Dumb and Dumberer – When Harry Met Floyd". The plaintiffs claimed the defendants imported and sold infringing copies of the films. The court found Aglow Video, the TS Group, and Speedy Video liable, lifting the corporate veil to hold certain directors personally liable. The court granted an injunction, damages to be assessed, and additional damages for the infringement of "Lord of the Rings – The Two Towers". The defendants' counterclaims were dismissed.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Plaintiffs’ claims partially allowed.
1.3 Case Type
Intellectual Property
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Copyright infringement case involving films. Court lifted corporate veil, holding directors liable for infringement by web of companies.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New Line Productions, Inc | Plaintiff | Corporation | Claims partially allowed | Partial | Wong Siew Hong, Teh Ee-Von |
| Alliance Entertainment Singapore Pte Ltd | Plaintiff | Corporation | Claims partially allowed | Partial | Wong Siew Hong, Teh Ee-Von |
| Aglow Video Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Found liable | Lost | Kirpal Singh, Liaw Jin Poh |
| TS Laser Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Found liable | Lost | Kirpal Singh |
| TS Entertainment Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Found liable | Lost | Kirpal Singh |
| Speedy Video Distributors Pte Ltd | Defendant | Corporation | Found liable | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Tay Yong Kwang | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Wong Siew Hong | Infinitus Law Corporation |
| Teh Ee-Von | Infinitus Law Corporation |
| Kirpal Singh | Kirpal and Associates |
| Liaw Jin Poh | J P Liaw and Co |
4. Facts
- First plaintiff owns copyright to "Lord of the Rings – The Two Towers", "Final Destination 2", and "Dumb and Dumberer – When Harry Met Floyd".
- Second plaintiff is the exclusive licensee in Singapore for replication and sale of the films in video format.
- Aglow imported 3,000 copies of TTT in VCD format into Singapore, purportedly from Mangpong in Thailand.
- Plaintiffs contended the VCDs and videotapes did not originate from Mangpong and were pirated copies.
- TS Group outlets continued to sell TTT even after an interim injunction was obtained.
- Aglow submitted VHS videotapes of FD2 and D&D to the FPB for censorship.
- The TS Group and Aglow were found to be working closely together.
5. Formal Citations
- New Line Productions, Inc and Another v Aglow Video Pte Ltd and Others and Other Suits, Suit 718/2003, 836/2003, 843/2003, [2005] SGHC 118
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| TTT first screened and published in the US | |
| FD2 and D&D first screened and published in the US | |
| Agreement granted exclusive licence to the second plaintiff to replicate and distribute the films in video format, including DVD and VCD, in Singapore | |
| Aglow imported 3,000 copies of TTT in VCD format into Singapore | |
| Aglow placed an advertisement in The New Paper | |
| Tan was informed by his staff that Aglow was distributing TTT on VCD | |
| Interim injunction obtained prohibiting the defendants in that action from dealing with the infringing TTT VCDs and ordering delivery up of the remaining ones | |
| Masters of TTT despatched by courier to Thailand | |
| Assigned street date for TTT | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Copyright Infringement
- Outcome: The court found that the defendants infringed the plaintiffs' copyright by importing and selling infringing copies of the films.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Importing infringing copies
- Selling infringing copies
- Lifting the Corporate Veil
- Outcome: The court lifted the corporate veil and held certain directors personally liable for the infringement.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Directors as directing minds
- Personal liability of directors
- Additional Damages
- Outcome: The court awarded additional damages for the infringement of "Lord of the Rings – The Two Towers".
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Flagrancy of infringement
- Benefit accrued to defendant
8. Remedies Sought
- Injunction
- Damages
- Account of Profits
- Additional Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Copyright Infringement
10. Practice Areas
- Copyright Infringement
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- Entertainment
- Film Distribution
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Salomon v A Salomon and Co, Ltd | House of Lords | Yes | [1897] AC 22 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that a company is a separate legal entity from its members or shareholders. |
| Rainham Chemical Works, Ltd v Belvedere Fish Guano Co Ltd | House of Lords | Yes | [1921] 2 AC 465 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that proof of a tort by a company does not automatically prove that the directors are also guilty of the tort. |
| Gabriel Peter & Partners v Wee Chong Jin | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1998] 1 SLR 374 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that proof of a tort by a company does not automatically prove that the directors are also guilty of the tort. |
| Performing Right Society, Ltd v Ciryl Theatrical Syndicate, Ltd | King's Bench Division | Yes | [1924] 1 KB 1 | England and Wales | Cited for the exception to the principle that directors may be liable as joint tortfeasors if they have procured or directed the wrong to be done. |
| TV Media Pte Ltd v De Cruz Andrea Heidi | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2004] 3 SLR 543 | Singapore | Cited for the principles on lifting the corporate veil and holding directors personally liable. |
| Columbia Picture Industries v Robinson | High Court of Justice | Yes | [1986] 3 WLR 542 | England and Wales | Cited for the principle that deliberate ignorance does not entitle a person to claim innocence. |
| Ong Seow Pheng v Lotus Development Corp | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1997] 3 SLR 137 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that additional damages are punitive in nature and should not translate into an extraordinary profit for the plaintiffs. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 31 Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 33 Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 119(4) Copyright Act (Cap 63, 1999 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Section 201B(4) Copyright Act | Singapore |
| Section 136 Copyright Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Copyright
- Infringement
- Corporate Veil
- Parallel Imports
- Cinematograph Films
- VCD
- DVD
- Directors' Liability
- Additional Damages
- TS Group
- Aglow Video
- Mangpong
- Rungreang
15.2 Keywords
- Copyright infringement
- Corporate veil
- Parallel imports
- Cinematograph films
- Directors' liability
- Additional damages
16. Subjects
- Copyright
- Corporate Law
- Intellectual Property
17. Areas of Law
- Copyright Law
- Company Law
- Intellectual Property Law