HKSAR v. LI KA HO TOMMY

HKSAR v. LI KA HO TOMMY

The affirmations under s.121 will be admissible where the statutory particulars are properly stated; the Court concluded that Chan Tak Tim establishes that corporate authors can fall within s.121 when the requirements are complied with, the magistrate was entitled to reject the defendant's credibility and find the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
HKSAR v. LI KA HO TOMMY
Parties
Appellant / Defendant: Appellant; Respondent / Prosecution: HKSAR
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
13 May 2005
Case Number
HCMA825/2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (copyright Offences) / Appeal Heard Before Deputy High Court Judge E Toh; Judgment 13 May 2005
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed except that convictions relating to the title Doraemon are deleted; appeal against sentence dismissed (abandoned at hearing).
Legal Topics
Admissibility of S.121 Affirmations, Proof of Copyright Ownership, Defence of Lack of Knowledge Under S.118(3), Credibility Findings, Statutory Construction of 'author'
Source Language
en
Copyright Criminal Law Evidence Intellectual Property Admissibility of S.121 Affirmations Proof of Copyright Ownership Defence of Lack of Knowledge Under S.118(3) Credibility Findings +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant / Defendant

HKSAR

Respondent / Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (copyright Offences) / Appeal Heard Before Deputy High Court Judge E Toh; Judgment 13 May 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.121 affirmations (P7 and P8) validly prove subsisting copyright and ownership where author is a corporate or non-flesh-and-blood entity
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved absence of licence as an ingredient of s.118 offences
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate was entitled to find the defendant had reason to inquire and reject the defendant's testimony on credibility grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The affirmations under s.121 will be admissible where the statutory particulars are properly stated; the Court concluded that Chan Tak Tim establishes that corporate authors can fall within s.121 when the requirements are complied with, the magistrate was entitled to reject the defendant's credibility and find the defence under s.118(3) failed, and the prosecution proved infringement and lack of licence for all titles except Doraemon where a material defect in the affirmation meant proof failed, so Doraemon must be deleted from the charge.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed except that convictions relating to the title Doraemon are deleted; appeal against sentence dismissed (abandoned at hearing).

Orders

  • Delete Doraemon DVDs from the charge
  • Convictions otherwise affirmed