ENGINEERING IN SOCIETY

TITTLE: COPYRIGHT

GROUP MEMBERS:

1. ABDULLAH ARIFUDDIN B ASHARI CE089756

2. AMIRUL MURSHIDI B MOHD RAZALI CE089758

3. NUR ATIQAH BT ZAINAL CE089786

4. NUR SYAHIRAH BT MOHD SHUHIMI CE089788

5. NUR ZUKRINA BT ZUHAIRI CE089789

LECTURER: PROF IR DR NORASHIDAH

SECTION: 05

GROUP NO: 08

Refers to creation of mind

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

COPYRIGHTINDUSTRIAL PROPERTY

Legal term describing rights given to creators for their literary and artistic works.

Related Rights are granted to performing artists, producers of sound recordings and broadcasting organizations.

Protected automatically in some conditions.

COPYRIGHT

Literary works

Musical works

Artistic works

FilmsSound

recordings

Broadcasts

Derivative works

WHAT DOES COPYRIGHT PROTECT?

Work must be originated from author and some effort must have gone into creation of work.

No Originality: Work is slavish copy of another work.

COPYRIGHT - ORIGINALITY

For Literary, Musical or Artistic works:a) The life of author + 50 years after his/her death.b) If the work has not been published during the lifetime of the author, the expiration date will start at the first date of the work publish and continue for the next 50 years.c) If the author combine their work, the Copyright will be given starting from the last author who died.

DURATION

PUBLISHED EDITIONa) Expiry of the copyright begin on

the next year from year of the work published in the period of 50 years.

DURATION

CASES UNDER COPYRIGHT

ACT 1969ACT 1987

LAU FOO SUN V GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA 1974

What is the case about?

Copyright and Literary work

Whether engineering drawings and designs prepared by engineer constitute original "literary works" -- Copyright Enactment (FMS Cap 73), ss 2, 3 & 8

Engineering drawings and designs

Summary of case

The appellant, a chartered civil and structural engineer, had claimed a declaration that he was entitled to the copyright in the engineering drawings and designs prepared by him for the construction of double-storey classrooms for school for the Government.

It was held in the High Court ( [1970] 1 MLJ 20)

Summary of case

The respondent had not rebutted the presumption that copyright existed in the appellant's works, as they had failed to prove that the appellant's works were nothing more than direct tracings of other original works or drawings.

The engineering drawings and designs were "literary work" within the meaning of the Copyright Enactment and they were also "original literary work" within the meaning of the Enactment.

Result of the case

The appellant shall have the refund of his deposit.

Accordingly, there will be an order for account in respect of the use of the drawings in the series 61020 which have not been bought by the Ministry and any amount found due under clause 14 upon taking such account shall be paid to him.

Referred to REGISTRATION OF ENGINEERS ACT 1967 Part IV :

Section 15 : Cancellation of Registration

Section 16: Removal of Registration

Section 17: Reinstatement of Registration

CANCELLATION, REMOVAL & REINSTATEMENT OF REGISTRATION

LONGMAN MALAYSIA SDN BHD V PUSTAKA DELTA PELAJARAN SDN BHD

22 September 1986

"LIST OF MAIN SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE PLAINTIFFS' LITERARY WORK ENTITLED "KURSUS ULANGKAJI RAMPAIAN SAINS" AND THE DEFENDANTS" LITERARY WORK ENTITLED "KURSUS LENGKAP PEPERIKSAAN SPM RAMPAIAN SAINS."

Plaintiffs' Literary Work Entitled "Kursus Ulangkaji Rampaian Sains."

Defendants' Literary Work Entitled "Kursus Lengkap Peperiksaan SPM Rampaian Sains."

1. The division of chapters (15 chapters) and the wordings in pages vii to x.

1. The division of chapters (15 chapters) and the wordings in pages vii to x almost the same (especially in pages vii and viii).

       2. The table in page 26. 2. The table in page 19.       3. The diagrams depicted in page 34

under Rajah 3.1 and 3.2.3. The diagrams depicted in 27 under

Rajah 3.1       

4. The table on page 57. 4. The table on page 53.       5. The diagrams and labels in page 71

under Rajah 5.11.5. The diagrams and labels in page 63

under Rajah 5.10.       6. The diagrams and labels in page 71

under Rajah 5.12.6. The diagrams and labels in page 64

under Rajah 5.11.       7. The diagram in page 72 under Rajah

5.13.7. The diagram in page 64 under Rajah

5.12.       8. The diagram in page 73 under Rajah

5.14.8. The diagram in page 65 under Rajah

5.13.       9. The diagram in page 73 under Rajah

5.15.9. The diagram in page 66 under Rajah

5.16.       10. The diagram in page 90 under Rajah

6.18.10. The diagram in page 83 under Rajah

6.17.

Plaintiffs' Literary Work Entitled "Kursus Ulangkaji Rampaian Sains."

Defendants' Literary Work Entitled "Kursus Lengkap Peperiksaan SPM Rampaian Sains."

       

11. The table in page 122 under 8.3 -- under the heading Keputusan for column C -- "Lemak dan Minyak" -- the statement 'Lemak dan minyak memberikan tanda lutsinar yang kekal lama.' The reprinted copy has the corrected version which reads 'lemak dan minyak memberikan tanda lutcahaya yang kekal lama.'

11. The table in page 107 under 8.2 -- under the heading Keputusan for "Lemak dan Minyak" -- the statement 'Lemak dan minyak memberikan tanda lutsinar yang kekal lama' is the same.

       

12. The diagram in page 137 Rajah 9.15. 12. The diagram in page 121 under Rajah 9.16.

       

13. The diagram in page 176 under Rajah 12.3 -- in the first printing (in 1979 due to printing error one dot has been missed out on the second bar from the left (left diagram). The error has been subsequently corrected in the reprint.

13. The diagram in page 158 under Rajah 12.6 the dot has also been missed out on the second bar from the left (left diagram).

       

14. The diagram in page 177 under Rajah 12.7.

14. The diagram in page 162 under Rajah 12.13."

Lawyer ordered that an injunction do issue, to restrain the defendant whether by itself, its directors, officers, servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever from doing the following acts or any of them that is to say :

“ (i) reproducing without the license of the Plaintiff any copies of the work entitled “KURSUS LENGKAP PEPERIKSAAN SPM RAMPAIAN SAINS – TERBITAN PERTAMA – 1980” or any other reproduction of the Plaintiff’s literary works entitled “KURSUS ULANGKAJI RAMPAIAN SAINS” or authorizing any of the acts aforesaid or otherwise infringing the Plaintiffs copyright in the said literary works entitled “KURSUS ULANGKAJI RAMOAIAN SAINS;”

(ii) selling by way of trade, exposing or offering for sale or distributing for the purpose of trade without the license of the plaintiffs any copies of the said literary works entitled “KURSUS LENGKAP PEPERIKSAAN SPM RAMPAIAN SAINS – TERBITAN PERTAMA – 1980” or any other reproductions of the plaintiffs’ said work entitled “KURSUS ULANGKAJI RAMPAIAN SAINS” and from authorizing any of the acts aforesaid ;

• Lawyer ordered the defendant to deliver up all infringing copies and plates in its possession, power, custody or control.

• Lawyer ordered an inquiry as to damages or at the plaintiff’s option an account of profits and payments of all sums found due upon such inquiry or account with interest thereon

• Lawyer also ordered payment of costs by the defendant.

GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO & ANOR v SILVERSTONE TIRE & RUBBER CO SDN BHD

Overall

Idea Fuction & Design of Tyre

Copyright Issue

Case Dismiss

CASES In this case, there are two plaintiff which the first

plaintiff was the manufacturer and seller and the second plaintiff was the Malaysian importer and seller of Aquatred tyres.

From the plaintiffs perspective, the Aquatred tyres has a unique and distinctive get up, namely, the centre groove, and that the defendant's Aquagrip tyres were reproduced either from the plaintiff's drawings or from the Aquatred tyres by reverse engineering.

GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO & ANOR v SILVERSTONE TIRE & RUBBER CO SDN BHD

• With regard to passing off, the plaintiffs argued that they had acquired a substantial degree of reputation and goodwill in the Aquatred tyres in that the get up was distinctive of the plaintiffs by reason of extensive use, sales and promotion in the United States and Malaysia.

• The defendant contended that the plaintiffs were seeking to protect the function of the Aquatred tyres which were not protected by copyright law.

• The case are dismiss based on a few factor that has been considered. Originally copyright law was concerned with the field of literature and the arts but, in seeking, in particular, to keep up with advances in technology, the protection given by copyright law has been considerably expanded over the years.

• But in this case, copyright law is not concerned with the reproduction of ideas, but with the reproduction of the form in which ideas are expressed. The plaintiffs were seeking to protect the idea of the function of the tyre and not its artistic value.

RESULT

• Since the Aquatre tyres had been in the Malaysian market for only eight months when this action was brought, it was too short a time to establish any goodwill and reputation. Since all tyres would have the brand names and tyre names imprinted on them, no confusion would arise as customers would, in practice, have chosen the brand first before deciding on the type of tyre they wanted.

RESULT

We have learned legal term and also know that the copyright is belong to the original author.

As an engineer, we have to avoid to do copyright infringement in the future because we realize the important of the integrity as an engineer.

We must practise as an engineer in the future with full of ethics and dedication.

CONCLUSION

THANK YOU