Source: http://www.singaporelaw.sg/sglaw/laws-of-singapore/commercial-law/chapter-13
Timestamp: 2018-06-19 22:13:33
Document Index: 321453417

Matched Legal Cases: ['§02', '§03', '§04', '§05', '§06', '§07', '§08', '§09', '§10', '§11', '§12', '§13', '§14', '§15']

Laws of Singapore Commercial Law Ch.13 Intellectual Property Licensing
13.3.2 For registered intellectual property rights, it is often a requirement that a licence be in writing to be effective. The Interpretation Act (Cap 1) provides that ‘writing’ and expressions referring to writing include printing, lithography, typewriting, photography and other modes of representing or reproducing words or figures in visible form. Section 42 of the Trade Marks act (Cap 332) (‘TMA’) is most explicit, and specifies that a trade mark licence is not effective unless it is in writing signed by or on behalf of the grantor. The writing requirement is more implicit with registered designs, since the signature of the grantor of the licence is required for the purposes of recordal: section 37(2)(b) Registered Designs Rules (‘RDR’). Unlike the trade marks and registered designs legislation, the Patents Act (Cap 221) does not require that a licence be entered in any particular form. As in the United Kingdom, an oral licence should be enforceable. For licences that are not performed within one year of the agreement, section 6(e) Civil Law Act (Cap 43) stipulates a writing and signature requirement for such agreements to be effective.
13.3.4 With registrable intellectual property rights, licences are registrable transactions. Until an application has been made for registration of the prescribed particulars of a registrable licence, that licence would be ineffective against a person acquiring a conflicting interest in the right in ignorance of the licence: section 34 Registered Designs Act (‘RDA’); section 43 PA; section 39(3) TMA. In the arenas of designs and patents, there are statutory limitations as to a right in damages or account of profits in respect of any infringement of the registered design or patent occurring after the date of the licence and before the date of application for the registration of the particulars of the licence: section 34(4) RDA; section 75 PA (for infringements occurring after the licence is executed, the transaction must be registered within 6 months of the date of the transaction, unless the court is satisfied that it was not practicable to register it in that period). The trade marks legislation amendments which took effect from 1 July 2004 no longer impose a requirement that a licence has to be recorded before the licensee is entitled to enforce its right to damages, account of profits or damages, notwithstanding non-registration. Under this new position, whilst a trade mark licence remains a registrable transaction (section 39(2)(b) Trade Marks Act), the transaction will not be considered ineffective against as against a person who acquires a conflicting interest in or under the registered trade mark in ignorance of a licence that has not been recorded (section 39(3) and (5) Trade Marks Act). The trade mark proprietor can still pursue a claim for damages, an account of profits or statutory damages in respect of any infringement of the registered trade mark that occurs after the date of the transaction and before the date of the recordal of the licence (section 39(4) and (5) Trade Marks Act).
13.6.1 Intellectual property licences are generally binding on successors-in-title, except a purchaser in good faith for value without actual or constructive notice of the licence, or a person deriving title from such purchaser (section 194(4) CA). The assignment of a licence may be proscribed by its express terms. In the case of electronic copies of any material purchased on or after 15 December 1999, if there are no express terms prohibiting the assignment of any licence or terminating any licence on transfer, anything that the purchaser was allowed to do may also be done without infringement of copyright by a subsequent transferee (section 193F(2)(a) CA).
13.7.4 In contrast to email transactions, the learned Judge in Digilandmall said that transactions over the worldwide web appeared to be clearer and less controversial. His Honour held (at para 101):
‘Transactions over websites are almost invariably instantaneous and/or interactive. The sender will usually receive a prompt response. This recipient rule appears to be the logical default rule.’
13.11.1 The non-derogation of grant doctrine (or ‘repair exception’) follows the authority of British Leyland v Armstrong [1986] RPC 279, which recognises that a person may repair an article as part of the original grant of the original design. In span (5th Ed) (Sweet & Maxwell, 2003) at page 539)
13.12.5 Other provisions of note include section 66(2)(g) Patents Act, which provides that it is a defence to infringement to show that the imported product was produced by or with the consent (conditional or otherwise) of the proprietor of the patent or his licence. Section 29(1) of the Trade Marks Act states that a registered trade mark is not infringed by the use of the trade mark in relation to goods which have been put on the market, whether in Singapore or outside Singapore, by the proprietor of the registered trade mark or with his express or implied consent (conditional or otherwise). This is subject to all-important caveat in section 29(2) that sub-section (1) does not apply where the conditions of the goods have been changed or impaired after they have been put on the market, and the use of the registered trade mark in relation to these goods is detrimental to the distinctive character or repute of the registered trade mark.
13.13.5 Para 8(2) of the Third Schedule defines a ‘vertical agreement’ to mean ‘..any agreement or concerted practice entered into between 2 or more undertakings each of which operates, for the purposes of the agreement, at a different level of the production or distribution chain, and relating to the conditions under which the parties may purchase, sell or resell certain goods or services.’ These agreements are excluded from the scope of the Competition Act, together with undertakings that are already regulated by other competition codes (for example the area of telecommunications, media and energy); activities that are subject to pre-existing legal requirements as well as exclusions justified on the grounds of public policy. (Paras 2 and 4 of the Third Schedule)
13.14.10 The Copyright Tribunal (‘the Tribunal’) is given jurisdiction to investigate a variety of licences, including licences to perform a literary, dramatic or musical work or an adaptation in the public; licences to broadcast the work (or an adaptation thereof); or licences to make a sound recording or film of the work (or adaptation thereof) for the purpose of broadcasting the work or including it in a cable programme service. (section 149 Copyright Act)
Where a person claims that he required a licence in a case to which a licence scheme does not apply (including a case where a licence scheme has not been formulated or is not in operation) and;
13.14.14 To-date there have only been two cases before the Copyright Tribunal; Singapore Broadcasting Corporation v Performing Right Society Ltd (1991) 21 IPR 595 (where the Tribunal reviewed the terms of a broadcast licence); and Sunvic production Pte Ltd v Composers and Authors Society of Singapore Ltd CRT No.1 of 1992 (unreported) (where a concert promoter remonstrated that a tariff rate imposed by a licence scheme was excessive).
For the apportionment of an amount payable in respect of a record between the owner of the copyright in a musical work and the owner of the copyright in a literary or dramatic work (sections 60(3)(b), 159 Copyright Act).
§02 Licence or Assignment?
§03 Formalities and Registration Requirements under Singapore Law
§04 Rights of Exclusive Licensees
§05 Revocation
§06 Transferability / Assignability
§07 Specialised Topics - Software Licensing
§08 Specialised Topics - Know-How and Information Control
§09 Specialised Topics - Implied Licences
§10 Specialised Topics - Dealings over the Internet
§11 Specialised Topics - Rights of Repair
§12 Specialised Topics - Parallel Imports and Exhaustion of Rights
§13 Specialised Topics - Competition Law and its Impact on Licensing in Singapore
§14 Specialised Topics - Compulsory Licensing
§15 Conclusion