Asia Television Ltd v Yaus Entertainment Pty Ltd (No 3) [2001] FCA 811

Asia Television Ltd v Yaus Entertainment Pty Ltd (No 3) [2001] FCA 811

Although the respondent's infringements occurred against a background that reduced the force of the applicants' criticisms, the respondent deliberately infringed copyright for commercial gain. Deliberate copyright infringement could not be justified as self-help, and payment of only a commercial licence fee would not satisfy the policy of s 115(4). Additional damages of $11,700 were therefore awarded, producing total damages of $24,960 when combined with the agreed licence-fee damages and amount due under the licence agreement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2001
Procedural Posture
Copyright Infringement Damages Proceeding / Assessment of Outstanding Monetary Claims, Including Additional Damages Under S 115(4) of the Copyright Act 1968 (cth), After Earlier Judgments
Outcome
The applicants were awarded total damages of $24,960 against the respondent.
Legal Topics
['copyright Infringement' 'additional Damages' 'licence Fee Damages' 'licence Agreement']
['copyright Law' 'contract Law'] ['copyright Infringement' 'additional Damages' 'licence Fee Damages' 'licence Agreement']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Copyright Infringement Damages Proceeding / Assessment of Outstanding Monetary Claims, Including Additional Damages Under S 115(4) of the Copyright Act 1968 (cth), After Earlier Judgments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What additional damages should be awarded pursuant to s 115(4) of the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) for infringement of copyright in the films "Flaming Brothers" and "Forest Cat II".' "Whether the respondent's deliberate infringement and surrounding circumstances justified damages beyond a commercial licence fee." 'What amount was due and payable under the licence agreement.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the respondent's infringements occurred against a background that reduced the force of the applicants' criticisms, the respondent deliberately infringed copyright for commercial gain. Deliberate copyright infringement could not be justified as self-help, and payment of only a commercial licence fee would not satisfy the policy of s 115(4). Additional damages of $11,700 were therefore awarded, producing total damages of $24,960 when combined with the agreed licence-fee damages and amount due under the licence agreement.

Court Disposition

The applicants were awarded total damages of $24,960 against the respondent.

Orders

  • ['The respondent pay the applicant the sum of $24,960 in damages.']