![[Article / Copyright] Supreme Court, Reiwa 3 (Ju) 1112, “Music school case” (Yoshinobu Hisamura, Patent, February 2024)](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/324a18_fb6fd013666c410282dccb34fb1264ea~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_332,h_250,fp_0.50_0.50,q_35,blur_30,enc_avif,quality_auto/324a18_fb6fd013666c410282dccb34fb1264ea~mv2.webp)
![[Article / Copyright] Supreme Court, Reiwa 3 (Ju) 1112, “Music school case” (Yoshinobu Hisamura, Patent, February 2024)](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/324a18_fb6fd013666c410282dccb34fb1264ea~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_319,h_240,fp_0.50_0.50,q_95,enc_avif,quality_auto/324a18_fb6fd013666c410282dccb34fb1264ea~mv2.webp)
[Article / Copyright] Supreme Court, Reiwa 3 (Ju) 1112, “Music school case” (Yoshinobu Hisamura, 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” them (it is not compulsion).
![Tokyo District Court, 2012 (Wa) 12351 [Rice Cake]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/324a18_1e68d290faf1421383ef0182da9fd77b~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_225,h_125,fp_0.50_0.50,lg_1,q_35,blur_30,enc_avif,quality_auto/324a18_1e68d290faf1421383ef0182da9fd77b~mv2.webp)
![Tokyo District Court, 2012 (Wa) 12351 [Rice Cake]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/324a18_1e68d290faf1421383ef0182da9fd77b~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_38,h_21,fp_0.50_0.50,q_95,enc_avif,quality_auto/324a18_1e68d290faf1421383ef0182da9fd77b~mv2.webp)