Jose Mari Chan wins court cases on 2 hits

WORKS are protected by the sole fact of their creation, irrespective of their mode or form of expression, as well as of their content, quality and purpose.”

Thus, the Supreme Court cited the Intellectual Property Code as it upheld Jose Mari Chan’s rightful ownership to two songs-both more than two decades old and both of which became hits-which an advertising firm earlier claimed the singer, who is also the composer, “unlawfully” recorded and distributed.

In a resolution signed by Clerk of Court Lucita Abjelina Soriano and dated March 7, 2005, the high court denied the request of publisher Bayanihan Music Philippines Inc. (Bami) for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and “found no merit” for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction against Chan and recording firm BMG Records.

On Aug. 8, 2000, Bami filed a complaint before the Quezon City Regional Trial Court against Chan and BMG Records for allegedly violating the code.

No justification

But the court said Bami should “show that it has ostensible right” to file the request. The court did not find “ample justification for the issuance of the writ,” the resolution stated.

Chan signed a contract with Bami on July 16, 1973, giving it the right to “maximize the commercial potential” of the song “Can We Just Stop and Talk A While” and, on March 11, 1976, the song “Afraid For Love to Fade.”

On the strength of the contracts, Bami applied and was granted a certificate of copyright registration for the two songs. Shortly after, Chan authorized BMG Records to record and distribute the songs as part of a Lea Salonga album.

Thus, Bami requested the Quezon City RTC for a TRO and/or writ of preliminary injunction against BMG Records and Chan to prevent further recording and distribution of the same songs.

Publication deals

In Chan’s response to the complaint, he said it was “never his intention to divest himself of all his rights and interests” over the songs, and that the contracts with Bami were “mere music publication agreements.” Chan added that Bami failed to “effectively advertise his songs for almost 20 years,” and that he was not aware that Bami had been granted copyrights to the songs.

On Feb. 20, 2001, the Quezon City RTC denied Bami’s request for a TRO, saying the publisher “was not able to show its entitlement to the TRO.” The lower court also denied Bami’s request for preliminary injunction on Aug. 24, 2001.

Bami’s motion for reconsideration was again denied on Jan. 10, 2002. It appealed the ruling before the Court of Appeals, which merely upheld it on Dec. 14, 2004.

In its March 7, 2005, resolution, the Supreme Court maintained that Chan, “who is undeniably the composer and author of the lyrics of the two songs, is protected by the mere fact… that he is the creator.”

It added that there was “no proof that [Bami] ever made use of the songs within the two-year period.”

Chan’s contracts with Bami expired on Oct. 1, 1975, and March 11, 1978.

The singer revoked the contracts with Bami on July 30, 1997, because he said the latter “had been remiss on its contractual obligations.” The revocation happened almost three years before Bami filed its complaint before the lower court, the SC resolution noted.

By this time, the high court said, Bami had no more right to further recourse. [source]

April 16, 2005
By Marinel Cruz
Inquirer News Service
Also published on page A3-1 of the April 17, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer.