All
| TITLE | Supreme Court Decision 2016Da20916 Decided November 15, 2018 【Damages, etc.】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
|
[1] In a case where users open a computer program installed in a secondary storage device such as a hard disc drive (HDD) by loading it into random access memory (RAM), a primary storage device, whether such usage of a computer program constitutes “temporary reproduction” under Article 2 Subparag. 22 of the Copyright Act (affirmative) The intent of the exclusion clause under Article 35-2 of the Copyright Act with regard to temporary reproduction, which is included in the concept of reproduction under Article 2 Subparag. 22 of the Copyright Act, and the scope of permissible temporary reproduction which is excluded from liability pursuant to the pertinent exclusion clause [2] In the case where: (a) Company A signed a distribution contract with Foreign Company B, the copyright holder of the software program in question; (b) Company B granted a concurrent use license through a license agreement regarding the pertinent software, which restricts concurrent use of the software by the number of users exceeding the maximum number of concurrent users licensed for that software; (c) Company A developed a software product that features a function that enables end-users of the pertinent software program to additionally secure a license, and sold the software product to the end users of the Company B’s software program; (d) the use of Company A’s software product enabled temporary reproduction of Company B’s software program exceeding the maximum number of licensed concurrent users into RAM of the users’ computers, the case holding that: (a) temporary reproduction made possible by Company A’s software product may not be considered as either inevitably accompanied in the course of using Company B’s software program or aiming solely for the enhanced stability or efficiency of the software program, but is rather considered as having an independent pecuniary value in and of itself; (b) therefore, Company A’s software product infringed Company B’s right of temporary reproduction |
|
