Well this is awkward. Last Friday, rival property listing sites 99.co and PropertyGuru concluded a long court battle over copyrights and contractual agreements. The funny thing is, both sides immediately went out to proclaim that they emerged victorious after the court ruling.
And they’re both not wrong. Kinda.
Two of the biggest property listings portals in Singapore went head to head in High Court in September last year, with PropertyGuru having sued 99.co over claims of copyright infringement. The latter was accused of reproducing content from the former’s site without permission — pictures uploaded on PropertyGuru by property agents bearing the PropertyGuru watermark appeared on 99.co.
But this was because property agents use a third-party digital app called Xpressor, which allows them to post listings across multiple portals, thus why some of the pictures bearing the PropertyGuru watermark was uploaded on their rival’s site.
In a judgment passed on Friday, Justice Hoo Sheau Peng noted that the copying, enlargement or resizing of an artistic work doesn’t make the resulting image a copyrighted work, The Straits Times reported. Being watermarked doesn’t mean that the altered image belonged to PropertyGuru either, she added. Thus, PropertyGuru’s claims that 99.co infringed copyrights were dismissed. PropertyGuru’s claims that their rivals induced property agents to breach their contracts were also thrown out.
But Justice Hoo did rule in favor of PropertyGuru on a claim that 99.co breached a settlement agreement made in 2015 — one that has the latter agree not to substantially reproduce any content found on websites owned by the former. 99.co was found to have substantially reproduced one listing with nine photographs from the PropertyGuru portal.
As such, Justice Hoo ordered 99.co to stop using the Xpressor app for 30 days, with PropertyGuru given the right to assess damages.
99.co: “A victory for the internet”
In a blog post written by 99.co founder and chief executive Darius Cheung, he celebrated the ruling as a massive win for “the internet and content creators“. Whoa.
“Naturally, we believe that the rights of the content belong to content creators,” he wrote, echoing sentiments that platforms don’t own photo rights by simply adding watermarks.
Cheung also expressed gratitude that “justice, fairness, and common sense prevailed”. Nothing was said about 99.co’s breach of settlement agreement, nor the amount that they’ll have to pay PropertyGuru in damages.
PropertyGuru: “The defendant broke the rules and we are happy that the court has validated that”
On the other hand, PropertyGuru’s own Senior Editor Romesh Navaratnarajah wrote that it was PropertyGuru that won the legal case against 99.co.
Commenting on the outcome of the case, PropertyGuru executive director and co-founder Jani Rautiainen noted that the verdict sent a strong message about fair play and good business ethics.
Regarding the court’s dismissal of their claims of copyright infringement, Rautiainen noted that they’ll be reviewing the merits of the decision and deciding the next course of action with their lawyers.
