The requirement of injury proof within a copyright lawsuit in SingaporeAAA IPRIGHT2
The need to prove injury made towards the goods, merchandise of a subject is large within the context of a lawsuit. This article will analyze the requirement of injury proof within a copyright lawsuit in Singapore.
The need to prove injury made to the plaintiff
In a lawsuit, the plaintiff generally has the burden of proving that they have suffered an injury or damage as a result of the defendant’s actions or inactions. To establish this, the plaintiff must typically provide evidence that demonstrates a causal link between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injury.
The evidence required to prove injury may vary depending on the nature of the case, but may include:
- Expert testimony: In some cases, expert witnesses may be called upon to testify about the nature and extent of the injury, and the likely cause of the injury.
- Testimony of witnesses: Witnesses who observed the injury or its effects may provide important testimony about what happened and how the injury affected the plaintiff.
- Documentation of lost wages or income: If the injury resulted in lost wages or income, documentation of these losses may be necessary to prove the financial impact of the injury.
In general, the plaintiff must present a preponderance of evidence to convince the court that they suffered an injury or harm as a result of the defendant’s actions. This means that the evidence must demonstrate that it is more likely than not that the injury occurred due to the defendant’s actions or inactions.
The requirement of injury proof within a copyright lawsuit in Singapore
Recently, High Court of Singapore has made a ruling on the copyright infringement lawsuit filed by American software firm Siemens Digital Industries Software against Singaporean medical equipment manufacturer Inzign Pe Ltd.
The American company Siemens sued Singaporean company Inzign for over SG$400,000 (US$297,435) on account of an Inzign employee installing an unlicensed version of the former’s NX Software in an unused computer laptop he found at their office’s toolroom.
But, in its verdict, the court determined that Inzign only paid just SG$30,574 (US$23,000) in damages. The court calculated the damages based on the licensing payments Siemens would have received from Inzign for using the software.
Siemens’ complaint sought SG$259,511 (US$193,000) in damages and an extra SG$200,000 (US$148,711) in punitive penalties. The court ruled that the SG$259,511 was excessive and that extra damages were unnecessary.
From December 2020 to April 2021, the Inzign employee was revealed to have utilized the program at least 15 times. After discovering that there were no administrative controls, he installed NX, a software solution for product development, on the laptop he discovered in the toolroom.
Although this is the action of one employee, it is the Inzign’s responsibility for not having a stricter anti-piracy policy and oversight on their employees. Nonetheless, the amount of compensation that Siemens demanded was too much considering the nature of the case which is the wrongdoing of one employee, presented by the proof they offered to the court.
It is unknown that Inzign has other employees committing the same actions or if this employee is the only scapegoat. Therefore, it can be concluded that the short amount of compensation is because Saemen hasn’t provided adequate proof on the damages, injuries made by Inzign. Damages must be proved even when it comes to aggravated damages.
*** Other Articles***
– You could visit here to see Procedure of Singapore Trademark Registration.
– You could visit here to check the required documents for filing trademark in Singapore
– You can also check the Fee of Trademark In Singapore here.
– You could check how to register trademark in Singapore here.
Contact AAA IPRIGHT: Email: email@example.com
Or sending your inquiry by filling the form: