Ching v. Salinas

G.R. No. 161295, June 29, 2005 

Petitioner’s claim: 

Petitioner Ching is a maker and manufacturer of a utility model, Leaf Spring Eye Bushing for Automobile, for which he holds certificates of copyright registration. Petitioner’s request to the NBI to apprehend and prosecute illegal manufacturers of his work led to the issuance of search warrants against respondent Salinas, alleged to be reproducing and distributing said models in violation of the IP Code. Petitioner insists that the IP Code protects a work from the moment of its creation regardless of its nature or purpose. Petitioner argues that the copyright certificates over the model are prima facie evidence of its validity.

Respondents’ claim: 

Respondent moved to quash the warrants on the ground that petitioner’s work is not artistic in nature and is a proper subject of a patent, not copyright.

Issues:

1. Whether or not petitioner’s model is an artistic work subject to copyright protection.

2. Whether or not petitioner is entitled to copyright protection on the basis of the certificates of registration issued to it.

Disposition of the case: 

The instant petition is DENIED for lack of merit.

Dictum: 

1. While works of applied art, original intellectual, literary and artistic works are copyrightable, useful articles and works of industrial design are not. A useful article may be copyrightable only if and only to the extent that such design incorporates pictorial, graphic, or sculptural features that can be identified separately from, and are capable of existing independently of the utilitarian aspects of the article. In this case, the bushing and cushion are not works of art. They are, as the petitioner himself admitted, utility models which may be the subject of a patent.

2. Copyright, in the strict sense of the term, is purely a statutory right. It is a new or independent right granted by the statute, and not simply a pre-existing right regulated by it. Being a statutory grant, the rights are only such as the statute confers, and may be obtained and enjoyed only with respect to the subjects and by the persons, and on terms and conditions specified in the statute. Accordingly, it can cover only the works falling within the statutory enumeration or description. That the works of the petitioner may be the proper subject of a patent does not entitle him to the issuance of a search warrant for violation of copyright laws.