[Article / Copyright] Supreme Court, Reiwa 3 (Ju) 1112, “Music school case” (久村吉伸, Patent, February 2024)
更新日：2 時間前
Article information
Categories: Copyright
Topics: Attribution of copyright use
Published on this website: 2026-09-29
[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” them (it is not compulsion).
(3) Consideration: Tuition is “consideration for teaching skills,” not “consideration for performing the music itself.”
Moving away from the “karaoke doctrine”
The Club Cat’s Eye Supreme Court decision (karaoke doctrine) had treated even karaoke sung by snack-bar customers as use attributable to the proprietor.
JASRAC sought to apply this reasoning to music schools, but the Supreme Court rejected the analogy as “involving different facts and being inappropriate” (translation of quotation).
A prominent view is that this judgment ended the karaoke doctrine and declared a break with the doctrine that had functioned for many years.
Originally posted on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7510495120484425728/
