Sanrio v. Edgar Lim

Cards (12)

  • Parties involved
    • Sanrio Co. Ltd. (plaintiff)
    • Edgar C. Lim (defendant)
  • What is the copyright ownership of Sanrio Co. Ltd.?
    Sanrio Co. Ltd. owns the copyright to various animated characters such as 'Hello Kitty' and 'Little Twin Stars'.
  • What did IP Manila Associates (IPMA) confirm in their market research?
    IPMA confirmed that Edgar C. Lim's store, Orignamura Trading, was selling imitations of Sanrio products.
  • What action did the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) take?
    The NBI obtained a search warrant and seized various Sanrio products from Lim's store.
  • Why was the complaint filed by Sanrio dismissed by the Task-Force on Anti-Intellectual Property Piracy (TAPP)?
    The TAPP dismissed the complaint due to insufficient evidence, stating that Lim obtained his merchandise from legitimate sources and relied on their representations that the items were genuine.
  • What did the Court of Appeals (CA) conclude in their decision?
    The CA concluded that the alleged violations had already prescribed under Act 3326 and that the DOJ did not commit grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the complaint.
  • What did the Supreme Court rule regarding the prescriptive period?
    The Supreme Court ruled that the filing of the complaint in the DOJ tolled the prescriptive period for the alleged violation.
  • What did the Supreme Court state regarding the factual findings of the DOJ?
    The Supreme Court stated that the factual findings of the DOJ in preliminary investigations should not be disturbed unless there is grave abuse of discretion.
  • What was the outcome of the Supreme Court's decision?
    The Supreme Court denied Sanrio's petition and upheld the dismissal of the complaint against Lim for copyright infringement.
  • Who bears the costs of the case?

    The costs of the case were imposed on Sanrio.
  • Was Edgar Lim liable for copyright infringement?
    No. Petitioner failed to prove that respondent knew that the merchandise he sold was counterfeit. Respondent, on the other hand, was able to show that he obtained these goods from legitimate sources.
  • Probable Cause
    reasonable grounds for legal actions