Patent Case Law and Intellectual Property Practice Blog

Explore existing articles on AI and intellectual property, including rights relating to voice and IP strategy in the AI era.

Explore articles on damages, injunctions and proof of infringement. The relevant considerations differ across legal fields and cases; consult the individual articles and their sources.

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Article / Copyright] Supreme Court, Reiwa 3 (Ju) 1112, “Music school case” (久村吉伸, Patent, February 2024) The Supreme Court did not regard students’ performances as being under the music school’s control, for these reasons: (1) Purpose: Students seek to “acquire and improve performance skills”; playing assigned pieces is merely a “means” to that end. (2) Autonomy: Students play of their own volition; teachers’ instruction merely “assists” t

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Article / Copyright] Appeal: Reiwa 4 (Ne) 10019; first instance: Tokyo District Court, Reiwa 2 (Wa) 24492, “Tweets pointing out tracing plagiarism” (久村吉伸, Patent, February 2024) (1) Reproduction and public-transmission rights (quotation defense) The purpose of attaching images to critical tweets was criticism. Quoting Y’s illustrations to identify the subject of criticism was held to be within the extent justified by the quotation’s purpos

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Copyright] Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2024 (Wa) 70368 (Presiding Judge Nakajima) [Issue 1] No infringement of the right of public transmission The subtitle translator undertook the translation work on an "all rights clear" basis. ⇒ In light of the course of negotiations and the ordinary meaning of the wording, this includes, at a minimum, permission for uses such as DVD sales and TV broadcasting. [Issue 2] Infringement of the right of

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Article / Personality rights, etc.] On the legal protection of voiceprints (大塚理彦, Patent, May 2025) 1. Personality rights and “voiceprint rights” Under current law, portrait rights are recognized on the basis of the right to pursue happiness under Article 13 of the Constitution. 2. Publicity rights The Supreme Court’s Pink Lady decision recognized the right to use exclusively the customer-attracting power of portraits and the like. 3. Copy

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Copyright] Osaka District Court, Case No. 2025 (Wa) 3632 (Presiding Judge Matsuami) The plaintiff, a former professor at Tokushima University, alleged that the defendant's program was the plaintiff's copyrighted work or a jointly owned copyrighted work. ⇒ The very existence of the "plaintiff's program" was not established. The plaintiff lost. 1. It must be said that what was created in the first place is entirely unclear, and the existence

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Copyright] Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2024 (Wa) 14955 (Presiding Judge Nakajima) *Quotation defense under Article 32(1) of the Copyright Act established. (Excerpt from the judgment — translated) The defendant criticizes D's very act of creating and posting the original image. Since the image at issue is the direct object of the criticism in the post, there is an extremely high necessity to attach it. The image attached by the defendant

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Copyright] Osaka District Court, Case No. 2024 (Wa) 5501 (Presiding Judge Matsuami) *Employer liability under Article 715(1) of the Civil Code recognized!! The manager was to perform managerial duties in accordance with various manuals prescribed by the defendant; whenever an unclear or uncertain matter arose, the manager was required to contact and consult the defendant; and prior written consent from the defendant was required for postin

Read the Japanese version / 日本語版を読む [Copyright] Tokyo District Court, Case No. 2023 (Wa) 70626 (Presiding Judge Takahashi) 1. The text of articles prepared by Kyodo News (the plaintiff) and distributed to newspaper companies does not fall within "miscellaneous news and reporting of current events that are merely communications of facts" (Article 10(2) of the Copyright Act), and qualifies as copyrighted works. The plaintiff's distributed articles show an inverted-pyramid struc