Court dismisses infringement action

COURTDISMISSESINFRINGEMENTACTION

LAURENTCARRIÈREANDMARIE-MICHÈLEMCDUFF*
LEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP
L
AWYERS,ANDPATENTANDTRADE-MARKAGENTS

InSmithv.Hayden,[2008CanLII64395(ONS.C.)],theSuperiorCourtofJusticeof
Ontariodismissedplaintiff’sActionfordamagesfortheinfringementofhiscopyright.
Inthisactiontheplaintiff,AndrewJamesSmith,allegedthatthedefendant,Micheal
Hayden,infringedhiscopyrightindrawingsconsistingofaseriesofpolygons.The
defendantcreatedaneonsculptureentitled“AllThingsBeingEqual”andtheplaintiff
claimsthattheideaforthatsculpturecamefromhisdrawingswhichheallegeshe
showedtothedefendantintheearly1970s.

TheissueofthisActioncomesdowntofourquestions:
1.Didthedefendantusetheplaintiff’sdrawingsasthebasisforhissculpture?
2.Whendidtheplaintiffbecomeawareofthedefendant’sallegedinfringement
ofcopyrightorwhencouldtheplaintiffreasonablyhaveknownofthealleged
infringement?
3.Ifthedefendant’ssculpturewasbasedontheplaintiff’spolygondrawings,is
itaninfringementofcopyright?
4.Ifthedefendant’ssculptureisaninfringementoftheplaintiff’scopyright,what
aretheplaintiff’sdamages?

Theplaintiffclaimthatintheearly1970sthedefendantwasveryinterestedinhis
polygondrawings.Whenhemethiminhisstudio,thedefendantaskedfora
permissiontokeeponeofthedrawingsbecausethatdrawinggavehimanidea.
Also,theplaintifftestifiedthatthedefendanttoldhimhewouldcomebacktohim
abouttheideaofcreatinganeonsculptureusingasitsbasis,theplaintiff’spolygon
drawings.Accordingtothedefendant,thatmeetingnevertooplace.

Theplaintiffallegedthatheonlybecameawareoftheexistenceofthesculpturein
lateyear2002andnotinthe1980’slikethedefendantwitness,MichealSowdon
(hereinafterSowdon),testified.Theplaintiffclaimthathedidhaveaconversation
withSowdonbutSowdonmisconstruedwhathesaid.Theconversationwasnot

©CIPS,2009.
*Lawyerandtrade-markagent,LaurentCarrière,isaseniorpartnerwithLEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP
amultidisciplinaryfirmoflawyers,andpatentandtrademarkagents.Marie-MichèleMcDuffisan
articlingstudentwiththefirm.Publishedinthe2009-01-15issueofWorldMediaLawReport.
Publication328.058.

2
abouttheScupltureofthedefendantbutaboutanothercontractthatoccured
betweenthem.

Moreover,thedefendantallegedthattheplantiffisnotentitledtocopyright
protectionovertheideaembodiedinhisdrawings.

First,theCourtfoundoddthattheplaintiffwasunabletodescribethelocationofthe
meetingwiththedefendant.Further,heneveraskedforthereturnofthepolygon
drawingshesupposedlyleftevenifhesaidtheywereveryimportantforhim.The
Courtthereforerejectedtheargumentthatthedefendantbasedhissculptureonthe
plaintiff’sdrawings.

Second,theCourtpreferedSowdon’stestimony.AccordingtotheJudge,itfollows
thattheplaintiffeitherknewaboutthedefendantsculptureanditssimilaritiestohis
polygondrawingsorheshouldreasonablyhavebeenexpectedtohaveknownby
thetimeofhisconversationwithSowdoninthelate1980s.Section41ofthe
CopyrightActpreventsacourtfromawardingaremedyinrelationtoan
infringementunlessproceedingsforinfringementarecommencedwithinthreeyears
aftertheinfringementoccurred,oriftheplaintiffdidnotknowandcouldnot
reasonablyhavebeenexpectedtoknowoftheinfringement,unlessproceedingsfor
infringementarecommencedwithinthreeyearsfromthetimetheplaintiffbecame
awareoftheinfringementorcouldreasonablyhavebeenexpectedtoknowofthe
infringement.TheproceedingwascommencedbyNoticeofActionissued
December31,2003.Therefore,pursuanttoSection41oftheCopyrightAct,the
Courtcannotawardtheplaintiffaremedy.

Third,TaylorJ,observedthattherecanbenosuggestionthatthedefendant
imitatedtheplaintiff’sworkasthetwoworksaresodissimilarinform.Atbest,the
defendant’ssculptureusedplaintiff’sideaofapolygonprogressiontocreateathree
dimensionalneonsculpture.Tothejudge’smind,tofindthatthedefendanthas
infringedtheplaintiff’scopyrightinhisdrawingsofpolygonprogressionswouldin
effectgivehimamonopolyovertheuseanyonecouldmakeofapolygon
progressionsofanyform.Asaresult,thedefendant’ssculpturedoesnotinfringethe
plaintiff’scopyrightinhisdrawingsofpolygonprogressions.

Finally,theCourtpointsoutthattheplaintiffdidnotleaveevidencethathehad
sufferedanydamagesasaresultoftheallegedinfringementandthedefendant
didn’tmadeanysignificantprofitfromhissculpture.Therefore,theplaintifffailedto
proveanydamagesarisingfromtheallegedinfringement.TheCourtalsoanalyzed
thequestionofpunitivedamagesandfoundthatinthiscase,itwasnotappropriate
eveniftheCourthadfoundthatthedefendanthadinfringedtheplaintiff’scopyright.

Plaintiffdidnotmeetitsburdeninthepresentcaseregardingthealleged
infringement,nordiditprovethatthedefendanthadcommittedanyfault
whatsoever.Thus,itsclaimwasdismissed.

3

ROBIC,ungrouped’avocatsetd’agentsdebrevetsetdemarquesdecommercevouédepuis1892à
laprotectionetàlavalorisationdelapropriétéintellectuelledanstouslesdomaines:brevets,dessins
industrielsetmodèlesutilitaires;marquesdecommerce,marquesdecertificationetappellations
d’origine;droitsd’auteur,propriétélittéraireetartistique,droitsvoisinsetdel’artisteinterprète;
informatique,logicielsetcircuitsintégrés;biotechnologies,pharmaceutiquesetobtentionsvégétales;
secretsdecommerce,know-howetconcurrence;licences,franchisesettransfertsdetechnologies;
commerceélectronique,distributionetdroitdesaffaires;marquage,publicitéetétiquetage;poursuite,
litigeetarbitrage;vérificationdiligenteetaudit.ROBIC,agroupoflawyersandofpatentand
trademarkagentsdedicatedsince1892totheprotectionandthevalorizationofallfieldsofintellectual
property:patents,industrialdesignsandutilitypatents;trademarks,certificationmarksandindications
oforigin;copyrightandentertainmentlaw,artistsandperformers,neighbouringrights;computer,
softwareandintegratedcircuits;biotechnologies,pharmaceuticalsandplantbreeders;tradesecrets,
know-how,competitionandanti-trust;licensing,franchisingandtechnologytransfers;e-commerce,
distributionandbusinesslaw;marketing,publicityandlabelling;prosecutionlitigationandarbitration;
duediligence.

COPYRIGHTER
IDEASLIVEHERE
ILATOUTDEMÊMEFALLUL’INVENTER!
LAMAÎTRISEDESINTANGIBLES
LEGERROBICRICHARD
NOSFENÊTRESGRANDESOUVERTESSURLEMONDEDESAFFAIRES
PATENTER
R
ROBIC
ROBIC+DROIT+AFFAIRES+SCIENCES+ARTS
ROBIC++++
ROBIC+LAW+BUSINESS+SCIENCE+ART
THETRADEMARKERGROUP
TRADEMARKER
VOSIDÉESÀLAPORTÉEDUMONDE,DESAFFAIRESÀLAGRANDEURDELAPLANÈTE
YOURBUSINESSISTHEWORLDOFIDEAS;OURBUSINESSBRINGSYOURIDEASTOTHE
WORLD

Trade-marksofLEGERROBICRICHARD,
LLP(“ROBIC”)