There is only one focus of dispute in the court debate. In other words, whoever can convince the judge on such a focus of controversy will be able to win. This also means a cold fact that the ammunition of lawyers on both sides will be all compressed at this point.

. As long as you lose on this point, the entire lawsuit will be lost.

Judge Takanashi's cold voice was like putting down a revolver at the scene and loading a bullet into the chamber, starting the Russian Roulette death game. The original and defendant lawyers would take turns picking up the pistol and firing at the opponent.

.It depends on who will be able to shoot the fatal bullet.

Miyagawa swallowed slightly, her hands trembling slightly. In this extremely high-pressure atmosphere, she had to become nervous. However, for Hirose, today...today, we must win this trial and put that

Get rid of the annoying Fujimura!

Miyagawa adjusted his breathing again, stood up from the plaintiff's seat and said:

"Chief Judge. Whether the collation of ancient books falls within the scope of protection of the Copyright Law, the key lies in determining whether it is a work stipulated in the Copyright Law. In other words, if the collation of ancient books is a work, it falls under the copyright

The scope of protection of the law. According to the provisions of the Copyright Law, the so-called work is an intellectual achievement that is original and can be copied in some tangible form. Therefore, the key to judging whether a certain text is a work is whether it is

Be original."

"In other words, how should we understand the connotation of 'originality' stipulated in the law."

Miyagawa's voice was very calm, and she elaborated step by step, gradually leading to the key to the problem. She pressed the remote control in her hand. The whiteboard next to the plaintiff's seat suddenly flashed, and lines of Western text appeared. (Note 1)

"Chief Judge. Regarding the standard for determining originality, the plaintiff's attorney requested the collegial panel to refer to the forehead sweating principle established in the case of Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co."

"In the case of Bresting v. Donaldson Lithography Co., Donaldson Lithography Co. was sued for copying commercial advertising illustrations created by Bresting. The federal appeals court held that the illustrations drawn by Bresting were for commercial use.

The advertisement is not protected by copyright law and the plaintiff’s application is rejected.”

"Later, the Federal Supreme Court overturned the appeals court's decision and held that commercial advertising falls within the scope of protection of copyright law."

"The key issue in this case is whether commercial advertising possesses the originality required by copyright law."

"According to the gist of the judgment of the Federal Supreme Court, the so-called originality is a personal reflection of the inner nature of an individual. Personality itself means the existence of a certain uniqueness. Even if it is just a simple writing by one person, it is inevitable

There will be a certain degree of uniqueness."

"In other words, as long as a person creates independently, this kind of creation itself already has the imprint of personality."

"So, in the case of independent creation, as long as a person has put in hard work and sweat, his text can be protected by copyright. This is the famous 'sweating forehead' principle."

"According to the 'sweat on the forehead principle', the source of copyright protection lies in the labor exerted by the author in the process of independent creation. In other words, the originality stipulated in the law does not equal originality. The core focus of its originality lies in independence

Create and sweat.”

Miyagawa's voice emphasized the specific connotation of originality. In the courtroom, the woman's eyes were blazing, she took a step forward and said:

"Chief Judge, let's go back to this case specifically. In the collation of ancient books in "The Journey to the East", all processes were completed independently by Xiachuan. He was the first to discover the 17 manuscripts of "The Journey to the Tang Dynasty" and started working on it.

To conduct proofreading. The plaintiff has proved that the word files of different versions of the electronically proofreading manuscripts in its computer equipment were formed and modified. The above evidence is sufficient to prove that the plaintiff's proofreading of Qian Tang Ji was an independent creation."

"At the same time, the plaintiff has provided evidence to prove that in the process of editing and editing of Qian Tang Ji, it was necessary to compare different manuscripts, screen, correct wording, divide paragraphs, add annotations, punctuate and break sentences, etc. It is difficult to decipher and restore the ancient Chinese original texts.

Under the circumstances, the above-mentioned projects are enough to prove that the plaintiff needs to invest a lot of hard work and sweat."

"In fact, the plaintiff Shiachuan also put in a lot of labor. Only the evidence presented by the plaintiff's attorney during the court investigation can be shown that Xiachuan stayed and borrowed books in different archives in various places for more than 557 days, which is enough to reflect the execution of the records of repatriation to the Tang Dynasty.

It takes a lot of effort to select schools.”

"To sum up, based on the interpretation of the originality connotation by the 'sweat on the forehead principle', the plaintiff Shimokawa should be deemed to have proofread the edited manuscript of the work involved in the case, "The Journey to the East" when he independently edited it and put in a lot of hard work.

It has originality as stipulated in the copyright law, and through the existence of originality, it establishes a 'work' as stipulated in the law."

"Therefore, the proofreading manuscript of Plaintiff Shimokawa's "Eastern Land Parade to Tang Dynasty" is a 'work' and falls within the scope of copyright protection. The proofreading draft published by defendant Fujimura is substantially similar to the plaintiff's work

, should bear the legal infringement liability for plagiarism!”

The discussion is completed.

The plaintiff's first attack was launched.

This woman, who seemed weak on the outside, showed an astonishing outburst at the very beginning of the trial. She first focused on the determination of "originality" and then explained it by citing Western precedents.

"Original" does not mean "original", but "labor for independent creation", which leads to the final conclusion step by step - the proofreading of ancient books is a work in the sense of copyright law.

The university management in the auditorium couldn't help but widen their eyes when they heard this interlocking discussion. Many university people had already tightened their hands. The beginning of the trial had already exceeded their expectations. They

As a layman in the law, I never thought that the so-called originality requirement could be achieved by independent creation. If that were the case, that would be terrible!

Utsunomiya was sitting in the dock with a rather relaxed expression. Even though Miyagawa had just made such a rigorous discussion and quoted Western legal precedents, in the eyes of this famous professor, it seemed that he could not pose any threat.

Next to him, Ikegami looked at Utsunomiya's relaxed expression and raised the corners of his mouth slightly. The vice president of the Tokyo Bar Association knew very well that once the court debate entered the stage, the issuance of legal opinions surrounding intellectual property rights would be a challenge.

It was a one-sided massacre. It was impossible for these two brats to withstand the great authority of Japan's famous jurisprudence.

Utsunomiya rubbed the joints of his wrists, his eyes full of sarcasm, like an adult looking at the babbling child in front of him, slowly stood up from the dock, "Chief Judge..."

…

…

…

…

[Note 1] The author would like to explain here that the civil codes of many countries stipulate that when the law is blank, academic doctrines can be invoked. The scope of academic doctrines includes foreign laws and foreign supreme court judgments. In intellectual property rights

It is particularly common for cases to cite foreign precedents.

In reality, even if our country does not recognize academic doctrines as a source of law, there are still a large number of cases that cite the principles of foreign precedents in actual intellectual property adjudication (such as the famous standard rule of contact with substantial similarity, which is derived from foreign precedents)
Chapter completed!