Wienberg, Cinar and several other individuals and companies are appealing against adecision allowing in part the action for infringement of copyright for Robinson andhis company Nilem Productions Inc..
In 1982, Robinson drew the firstsketches of the characters of the proposed children's television series to be calledRobinson curiosity and he sets the characters and their character in a literaryform.
In 1985, the Copyright Office issues a registration certificate indicatingthat Robinson Robinson Curiosity is the author of the work and Nilem is the owner.
Robinson and Nilem multiply efforts for the promotion and production of their work.
They contact several companies, including Cinar.
Considerable efforts have beenexhausted.
In September 1995, there is diffusion in Quebec the first episode ofRobinson Sucro, work produced by Cinar France Animation and Ravensburger.
Robinsonand Nilem believe there are too many similarities between Sucro and curiosity.
In1996, they brought an action for infringement and damages against Wienberg andpersons and companies involved in the dissemination of Sucro Robinson.
The trialjudge allowed the action in part and awarded damages totaling $ 5,224,293.
Theruling was challenged in terms of the original character of the work of Robinson,the personal liability of certain defendants appellants and the calculation ofdamages.
HELD: Appeal allowed in part.
Wienberg and Cinar do not demonstrate a palpable andoverriding error in the analysis and conclusion of the judge regarding theoriginality of the work Robinson curiosity.
The fact that this is a project that hasnot been completed is not an impediment to the work to be protected to the extentthat it is sufficiently developed and goes beyond the ideas stage .
Although theCourt does not share all the grounds of trial decision, Wienberg and Cinar notconvinced that the judge committed a reviewable error in concluding that there wassubstantial recovery of the work Robinson Curiosity, except relates to music rights.In this regard, the judge erred in concluding the inseparability of the musical workand the literary work of Robinson Sucro.
He also erred in holding the personalresponsibility of Davin, CEO of France Animation.
The facts do not establish that heknew the infringement or played any role in it.
In addition to the legal fees of $1.5 million, Robinson and Nilem receive compensatory damages of $ 725,839, paying $260 577 in profits and punitive damages of $ 250 000 overall.
Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss.
Quebec Civil Code, art.
Under the Canada Business Corporations Act, art.
Law on Copyright Act, RSC (1985), c.
3 (1), Art.
3 (1) (a), Art.
13 (4), Art.
14.1 (1), Art.
27 (1), Art.
34 (1), Art.
34 (2), Art.
Me Pierre Y.
Lefebvre, Mr. Alain Y.
Dussault and Mr. Silviu Bursanescu (FaskenMartineau DuMoulin LLP), counsel for the appellants, France Animation SA, ChristopheIzard, Ravensburger Film + TV GmbH and RTV Family Entertainment AG.
Mr. William Brock and Mr. Aubé-Christine Gagnon (Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg
Page 3of 67Translated version of 11-France_Animation,_s.a._c._Robinson,__J12/29/2011http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_f