Singapore: Who Owns the Copyright?

31 May 2023

Singapore: Who Owns the Copyright?

Singapore: Who Owns the Copyright?

When a client secures the services of a photography studio for a photo-taking session, who owns the copyright to the photographs taken during that session? The Appellate Division of the Singapore High Court considered this question in the present appeal.

GHM was a hotel management company who secured the services of Wave, a photography studio, to photograph GHM’s hotels. This appeal was brought by GHM against the finding of the lower court that A) it had infringed Wave’s copyright by circulating photographs without Wave’s permission; and B) award of costs on indemnity basis.

 

High Court’s decision in respect of A

Despite there being no formal written contract of service between the parties, Wave had expressly stipulated in its production estimates that Wave held the copyright in the photographs. Wave commenced the proceedings in the lower court when it found out that the photographs were circulating online and in GHM’s publications. The lower court held that GHM accepted Wave’s reservation of the copyright in the hotel photographs, and that GHM infringed upon Wave’s copyright by circulating the photographs. 

The High Court held that under the Copyright Act in force at the time – which has since been repealed – the starting position for commissioned works that the “author” owned the copyright, could be displaced if a client entered into a legally binding contract. However, the High Court Judge held that the parties here had expressly contractually stipulated for the copyright over the photographs to vest in Wave through a “reservation clause” in Wave’s production estimates. Given that there was no formal contract as between the parties, the production estimates constituted an offer which would become a binding agreement once accepted. The reservation clause thus had a binding effect upon acceptance.

The High Court rejected GHM’s attempts to make new submissions interpreting the reservation clause, and deemed them an abuse of process. The High Court held that, based on GHM’s earlier evidence, GHM only took issue with how it was not made aware of the reservation clause. GHM never once disputed the reservation clause’s meaning throughout the parties’ working relationship. 

The High Court thus rejected GHM’s arguments that, as the commissioner of the photographs, it had an implied license to place the photographs in its publications and dismissed the appeal accordingly.

 

High Court’s decision in respect of B

Wave had earlier made an offer to settle, subject to parties agreeing to terms of a draft Consent Judgment, including GHM agreeing to pay standard costs of proceedings to Wave as at the date of acceptance of the offer to settle.  When the lower court awarded costs to Wave on indemnity basis, GHM appealed.

The High Court held that the offer to settle was a serious and genuine offer and remained valid as it had neither an expiry date, nor had been withdrawn.  Further, the lower court judgment was indeed less favourable than the terms of the offer to settle.  Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal and awarded costs on a standard basis instead. 


About the author

 Denise Mirandah

Denise Mirandah

As a Director, Denise Mirandah has played a major role in the international promotion of the company, helping to share the family values of Mirandah Asia and its successful one-stop shop approach to IP with clients all over the world.

Denise has had a passion for IP from an early age and, as the daughter of Patrick and Gladys Mirandah, grew up in a household where IP was discussed regularly. She studied her Bachelor of Laws at the prestigious Cambridge University in the UK. There, she underwent rigorous academic training with the world’s most eminent legal minds, including Professor Bill Cornish, a renowned authority on IP law.

During her summer holidays, she attended Harvard University in the US to hone her drafting skills and familiarise herself with the American legal system, voluntarily working as part of Harvard’s pro bono programme in Boston.

Denise has been admitted to the Bar in Singapore since 2009, and in Brunei as of 2017.

 Wen Rui Jin

Wen Rui Jin

Wen Rui Jin graduated from the National University of Singapore with an LLB (Hons) in 2020, and was subsequently called to the Singapore Bar in August 2021. He started his legal career in shipping law at a Big Five law firm. As an associate at Mirandah Law, Jin works on various trademark matters and disputes, and takes on a broad range of other matters including general civil disputes. He also assists with patent infringement cases of the firm. 

Law firms


Law firms

Please wait while the page is loading...

loader