Low Hop Bing J:

Plaintiff's Claim

[1] The plaintiff's claim is based on the defendant's infringement of the plaintiff's copyright; and unlawful interference with the plaintiff's trade or business. The plaintiff seeks:

2

(1) An injunction to restrain the defendant from the infringement and interference ("the injunction);

(2) An order for delivery up, within seven days from the date of judgment, and to file an affidavit verifying the same;

(3) An order for disclosure, within seven days from the date of judgment, and to file an affidavit verifying the same;

(4) Damages for copyright infringement;

(5) (Withdrawn);

(6) Damages for unlawful interference with the plaintiff's trade or business;

(7) Additional damages under s 37(2) of the Copyright Act 1987;

(A reference hereinafter to a section is a reference to that section in the Copyright Act 1987, unless otherwise stated.)

(8) Interest at 8% p a on all the damages awarded, from the date of judgment to the date of realisation;

(9) Costs; and

(10) Further or other reliefs.

Finding Of Facts

[2] The trial reveals that the plaintiff is a private limited company carrying on the business of manufacturing and distributing anti-car theft system ("the anti-theft system") made specifically for Proton Iswara, Proton Wira, Proton Perdana, Proton Satria, Perodua Kancil, Perodua Kembara and Perodua Kenari cars ("the cars") sold under the trade mark "THEF-PRO" since 1991.

[3] The plaintiff is the owner of the copyright subsisting in the drawings of the metal components which make up the anti-theft system, being artistic work and three-dimensional reproductions of the drawings thereof.(for convenience, in this judgment, the words "work" and "works" are used interchangeably).

[4] The defendant (DW2) is the sole proprietor of a business, selling car accessories.

[5] The plaintiff adduced evidence that the defendant has infringed and is continuing to infringe the plaintiff's copyright by distributing, selling, offering or exposing for sale metal components, of an anti-theft system, sold under the trade mark "Safety-first Anti-car Theft System", which are reproductions of the whole work or substantial reproductions of the plaintiff's artistic work in the drawings of the metal components in Malaysia without the plaintiff's licence or consent.

[6] The plaintiff has previously obtained consent judgments against three other parties viz the manufacturers Wymond Auto Accessories; Mobilesave Trading; and Soon Yi Engineering & Trading (collectively "the manufacturers"), for infringement of the plaintiff's copyright by manufacturing and selling reproductions of the drawings under their trade marks "Safety-point and Safety-first."

[7] In the consent judgment, the parties have inter alia:

(a) agreed and acknowledged that the plaintiff is the copyright owner of the drawings of the metal components of an anti-theft system made for the cars which were sold under the trade mark "Thef-Pro";

(b) agreed to cease infringing the copyright of the plaintiff and/ or passing-off the metal components of an anti-theft system not of the plaintiff's manufacture, as and for the metal components of the plaintiff's anti-theft system for the cars; and

(c) agreed to deliver up to the plaintiff all products which were infringing the plaintiff's copyright, including all infringing metal components and/or the boxes where the same were placed, and metal components of an anti-theft system sold under the trade marks "Safety-First" and "Safety-Point".

[8] The plaintiff has also obtained settlements and judgments against other retailers including Cosplus Auto Mart Sdn Bhd.

[9] In effect, the manufacturers have admitted to infringing the plaintiff's copyright.

[10] Since the defendant was selling and distributing to the public infringing goods under the mark "Safety-first Anti-car Theft System", it follows that the defendant has also infringed the plaintiff's copyright in the drawings.

[11] The defendant had business dealings with and sold the anti-theft system