About Intellectual Property IP Training Respect for IP IP Outreach IP for… IP and... IP in... Patent & Technology Information Trademark Information Design Information Geographical Indication Information Plant Variety Information (UPOV) IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments IP Resources IP Reports Patent Protection Trademark Protection Design Protection Geographical Indication Protection Plant Variety Protection (UPOV) IP Dispute Resolution IP Office Business Solutions Paying for IP Services Negotiation & Decision-Making Development Cooperation Innovation Support Public-Private Partnerships AI Tools & Services The Organization Working at WIPO Accountability Patents Trademarks Designs Geographical Indications Copyright Trade Secrets Future of IP WIPO Academy Workshops & Seminars IP Enforcement WIPO ALERT Raising Awareness World IP Day WIPO Magazine Case Studies & Success Stories IP News WIPO Awards Business Universities Indigenous Peoples Judiciaries Youth Examiners Innovation Ecosystems Economics Finance Intangible Assets Gender Equality Global Health Climate Change Competition Policy Sustainable Development Goals Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions Frontier Technologies Mobile Applications Sports Tourism Music Fashion PATENTSCOPE Patent Analytics International Patent Classification ARDI – Research for Innovation ASPI – Specialized Patent Information Global Brand Database Madrid Monitor Article 6ter Express Database Nice Classification Vienna Classification Global Design Database International Designs Bulletin Hague Express Database Locarno Classification Lisbon Express Database Global Brand Database for GIs PLUTO Plant Variety Database GENIE Database WIPO-Administered Treaties WIPO Lex - IP Laws, Treaties & Judgments WIPO Standards IP Statistics WIPO Pearl (Terminology) WIPO Publications Country IP Profiles WIPO Knowledge Center World Intangible Investment Highlights WIPO Technology Trends Global Innovation Index World Intellectual Property Report PCT – The International Patent System ePCT Budapest – The International Microorganism Deposit System Madrid – The International Trademark System eMadrid Article 6ter (armorial bearings, flags, state emblems) Hague – The International Design System eHague Lisbon – The International System of Appellations of Origin and Geographical Indications eLisbon UPOV PRISMA Mediation Arbitration Expert Determination Domain Name Disputes Centralized Access to Search and Examination (CASE) Digital Access Service (DAS) WIPO Pay Current Account at WIPO WIPO Assemblies Standing Committees Calendar of Meetings WIPO Webcast WIPO Official Documents Development Agenda Technical Assistance IP Training Institutions Build Back Fund National IP Strategies Policy & Legislative Advice Cooperation Hub Technology and Innovation Support Centers (TISC) Technology Transfer Inventor Assistance Program WIPO GREEN WIPO's Pat-INFORMED Accessible Books Consortium WIPO for Creators WIPO Translate Speech-to-Text Classification Assistant Member States Observers Director General Activities by Unit External Offices Staff Positions Affiliated Personnel Positions Procurement Results & Budget Financial Reporting Oversight
Arabic English Spanish French Russian Chinese
Laws Treaties Judgments Browse By Jurisdiction

Panama

PA017-j

Back

2025 WIPO IP Judges Forum Informal Case Summary-Third Tribunal, First Judicial District of Panama [2025]: Entidad de Gestión Colectiva de Derechos de Productores Audiovisuales de Panamá (Egeda-Panamá) v Hotelera el Panamá, S.A., Case No. 08-08-01-10-3-79787

This is an informal case summary prepared for the purposes of facilitating exchange during the 2025 WIPO IP Judges Forum.

 

Session 5: Copyright Related Rights

 

Third Tribunal, First Judicial District of Panama [2025]: Entidad de Gestión Colectiva de Derechos de Productores Audiovisuales de Panamá (Egeda-Panamá) v Hotelera el Panamá, S.A., Case No. 08-08-01-10-3-79787

 

Date of judgment: July 28, 2025

Issuing authority: Third Tribunal, First Judicial District of Panama

Level of the issuing authority: Appellate Instance

Type of procedure: Judicial (Civil)

Subject matter: Copyright and Related Rights (Neighboring Rights)

Plaintiff: Entidad De Gestión Colectiva De Derechos De Productores Audiovisuales De Panamá (Egedapanamá)

Defendant: Hotelera el Panamá, S.A.

Keywords: copyright infringement, copyright related rights, audiovisual works, standing, legal presumption

 

Basic facts

 

The Court of First Instance ordered the cessation of the use of public communication devices and the making available of audiovisual works represented by the Entidad De Gestión Colectiva De Derechos De Productores Audiovisuales De Panamá (Egedapanamá) in a hotel, both in common areas and in guest rooms, and issued an abstract judgment since the amount was not proven. The amount was to be determined later through expert accounting evidence, applying the tariff approved by the National Copyright Office and a surcharge under the Law, taking into account the number of devices and televisions in the hotel.

 

The defendant appealed the decision, arguing that the Collective Management Entity cannot exercise economic rights on behalf of authors and that the Berne Convention excludes audiovisual producers from protection. It claimed these were related rights and the Collective Management Entity was required to prove ownership of the works. The appellant further argued in its appeal that the inventory of technological equipment was not sufficient to prove the infringement (public communication and making available to the public) or unlawful use, and therefore requested that the judgment be overturned.

 

Held:

 

The Court of Appeals recognized the legal standing of the Collective Management Entity of Audiovisual Producers’ Rights to bring lawsuits, based on its recognition by the National Copyright Office and the approval of general tariffs for users of audiovisual works, specifically in hotel accommodation services.

 

Relevant holdings in relation to Copyright Related Rights:

 

The Court explained that, in this case, the plaintiff manages audiovisual works (copyright) and not related rights, but that the purpose of the Collective Management Entity, regarding its operating rules and administrative and judicial actions, also applies to related rights. Furthermore, pursuant to Article 139 of the Panamanian Copyright Law, these entities benefit from a legal presumption in their favor, which the alleged infringer must rebut with evidence showing payment of the approved tariffs or authorization from the rights holders. The Court thus upheld the decision of the Court of First Instance.

                                                                                      

Relevant legislation: Panama Copyright Law, Berne Convention