Intellectual Property Cases
Cases related to the Army, Navy and Air Force Punishment Law, Sexual Harassment Complaint Investigation and Regulations on Gender Classification, Unfit for Active Duty and other Regulations on Military Rights and Interests
Contact Us
Mr. A was aware that Clothing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Company B”) had established a live-streaming platform on Facebook, and that the related live-stream videos constituted audiovisual works protected by copyright, still within the term of economic rights. Without the consent or authorization of Company B, such works could not be reproduced or publicly transmitted. Nevertheless, with intent to infringe upon the copyright of another, Mr. A, on a certain date and without Company B’s consent or authorization, captured screenshots of the aforementioned live-stream videos and uploaded the images to a ***LINE group.
It was therefore alleged that Mr. A had violated Article 91, Paragraph 1, and Article 92 of the Copyright Act.
Our firm argued that Mr. A was merely selling second-hand clothing purchased from Company B within the group, and had even inquired with Company B beforehand. Company B only stated that such sales should not be conducted in LINE groups. Mr. A merely used screenshots of the livestream to illustrate the clothing intended for resale. Furthermore, the group’s notes clearly indicated that it was a second-hand trading group and not an official sales channel.
At the conclusion of the investigation, Mr. A received a non-prosecution ruling.
Relevant Legal Provisions
Copyright Act, Articles 91(1), 92, and 44–63.