Reference is made to the law report (TMID, 10 June), entitled Infringement of copyright.

We would like to inform you that the article deals with proceedings which are still pending before the First Hall of the Civil Court in the names of RMF Publishing and Surveys Limited vs Airport Value Marketing Association et.

In our view the above mentioned article is misleading since it gives readers the impression that the court has issued final judgement on the merits of the case and that the court has already determined that there has been a breach of copyright by the defendants. This is not the case.

The ‘judgement’ which the article refers to is not the final judgement on to the actual suit dealing with the merits of the case. Rather, the decision which the article is based on is one given by the court in relation to the issue of a warrant of prohibitory injunction against the defendants. The decision on the issuance or otherwise of a warrant of prohibitory injunction is separate to the actual suit on the alleged breach of copyright which has been filed by the plaintiff.

When deciding whether to issue a warrant of prohibitory injunction, the court assesses only whether there is sufficient prima facie evidence to indicate the possibility of a breach of copyright (in this case the court had to assess whether there was prima facie similarity between the two maps in question) and does not go into the merits of the case. The existence or otherwise of the breach of copyright shall only be decided by the court at the end of the proceedings of the actual suit once both parties have put forward all their arguments. In this case, such proceedings have commenced only recently and are still in the initial stages.

The article makes no distinction between the decision to order the issue of a warrant of prohibitory injunction and the judgement which is to be given by the court on the merits of the case.

In these proceedings, both Airport Value Marketing Association and Malta International Airport plc claim that no copyright has been breached and a decision on the matter has not yet been given by the Court. The article, however, gives the impression that the defendants have already been held to be liable for breach of copyright.

Consequently, such an article is prejudicial to the interests of both the Airport Value Marketing Association and Malta International Airport plc.

Rosette Fenech

Head of Communications

Malta International Airport