VC - Did you take part in the
Providência Cautelar (injunction judgement)
hearings?
LF - Yes, but I don't remember when I
took the stand.
VC refers to the DVD audiovisual adaptation
of GA's book which was commercialised at the end
of 2009. Was it edited by Valentim de
Carvalho?
LF - Yes
VC - Who edited the DVD version which went on
sale?
LF - VC Multimédia distributed. I
don't know who edited.
VC - I'm talking of the copies of the DVD.
LF - VC Multimédia edited them.
VC - Wasn't the Correio da Manhã in
charge of them?
LF – They had to be distributed.
VC - Who commercialised them?
LF - For me, commercialising or
distributing is the same thing. The unique
contract that existed was through the CdM.
The Court Clerk is asked to show the contract
to the witness.
VC - The edition was made by the CdM.
LF - It was the CdM who sold the DVD to
the public.
VC - Did VC commercialise the DVD?
LF says that for him "editing" is
"editing" (montar)
(Note: the Portuguese "editar" that has been
translated "edit" means establish the
reproduction, publication and diffusion of a
work. The Portuguese, as other languages,
uses "montar" for "editing" a film).
VC - Who created the cover, the packaging?
LF says it was VC Multimédia .
VC - Then you've not looked at the contract?
Do you have an issue with Valentim de
Carvalho? In Court?
LF says he has.
The Judge – Are you the executing or the
executed one?
LF says the action is against VC.
LF says that there is a problem of
definition: VC produced a documentary, and then
looked for the best way to distribute it and
found CdM.
VC - Who created the cover and the packaging?
Who was responsible for this?
LF says he doesn't remember. Normally the
producer would do that, but in this case it
might have not happened this way.
VC - What about the silver seals with the
registration number?
LF doesn't know.
VC - Do you know how many copies were made?
LF says he knows.
VC - Do you know how many copies were
destroyed?
LF says that all copies left over were
destroyed.
VC - Was there a new edition of the DVD?
LF thinks "no".
VC – The documentary appeared with subtitles
on the Internet.
LF says that everything, all sorts of
things appear on the Web.
VC – But with subtitles?
LF doesn't remember.
VC requests that the examination of the
witness continues but on another subject.
VC - Don't you remember seeing that
documentary on the Web?
LF says he already stated in Court in
January 2010 that he didn't.
VC - Do you think it could be that
documentary?
LF says that there is no control over the
release of films on the Internet.
VC - Did VC Multimédia already have
the film subtitled?
LF answers "no".
VC - Did VC Multimédia use a system to
prevent pirating on the Internet?
LF thinks they don't. He adds it's not
rare to see a subtitled series on the Internet
before they're broadcast on TV.
VC's next question relates to the Providência
Cautelar or Injunction but the Judge objects on
the basis that it is not relevant, the main
action being the present hearing.
VC now alludes to the watermark, the
documentary having been sold on the
international market.
VC - Did the international sales concern TV
channels or the DVD market? Was there edition
and sale of DVDs in foreign countries?
LF says he doesn't remember.
VC - Who bought the documentary?
LF says that various TV channels bought
it.
VC - Was the DVD protected by a watermark?
LF says it was normal that it was.
VC answers a question by the Judge about the
watermark and explains that the original
documentary is supposed to have a bandwidth (a
signal processing).
b) Gonçalo Amaral's lawyer, Dr. Santos de
Oliveira.
SO - As General Director, you had to have
knowledge concerning the distribution of the
DVD.
LF - Yes.
SO - Weren't you supposed also to know how
many copies were distributed?
LF says he doesn't remember.
SO - You knew how the DVD was created;
shouldn't you also know what kind of protection
was applied to the copies?
LF says he didn't have to know that.
SO - Could some alteration be made without
your knowing about it?
LF says "no".
SO - Did you know whether there was
protection against pirate copying?
LF says that practically there's always a
way to bypass any protection.
2) The Plaintiffs' lawyer, Dra Isabel Duarte.
ID - Where was the watermark?
LF says it was in the DVDs sold in
foreign countries.
ID - Which countries?
LF says he doesn't know, since he didn't
sell them, he doesn't remember. He adds that the
only entity that commercialised the DVD was the
CdM.
The Judge asks if the unsold DVDs were
destroyed.
LF says "yes", all those which weren't
sold were destroyed.
The Judge asks the witness how he knows that.
LF - I was told so.
The Judge – Who told you?
LF - The CdM.
The Judge - Is this a normal procedure?
LF - It is.
The Judge - When there's no further
expectation of selling additional copies, then,
before destroying them, do they let you know
that they are about to destroy them?
LF - Yes, the CdM announced it
beforehand.
Evidence ends.
Note
This witness previously took the stand in the
Providência Cautelar (Temporary Injunction)
hearings.
Civil Court decision in the Injunction
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id339.html
LINK
