Because copyright arises without registration, proving who owns it can be the hardest part of a claim. Section 19 of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2000 supplies the presumptions.
Section 19(1) — the basic presumption
A person whose name is indicated as the author of a work shall, in the absence of proof to the contrary, be presumed to be the author of the work.
There is no Copyright Office in Papua New Guinea, no register, and no certificate. A claimant cannot produce a registration to prove title, as a trade mark proprietor can under the Trade Marks Act (Chapter 385).
Section 19(1) fills the gap. A name on the work shifts the burden: the person disputing authorship must prove the contrary. In practice that makes putting your name on your work the single cheapest and most effective step an author can take.
Note that the presumption is of authorship. Under section 18, the author is normally the first owner of the economic rights — but not where the work was made in the course of employment, or is a collective or audiovisual work. Establishing authorship and establishing ownership are two steps, not one.
Section 19(2) — pseudonyms
Subsection (1) applies where the name is a pseudonym and there is no doubt as to the identity of the author.
An author who exercises the moral right in section 7(1)(c) to use a pseudonym does not lose the benefit of the presumption — provided the pseudonym is one by which the author is identifiable. A well-known pen name, stage name or artist’s mark satisfies subsection (2); an untraceable alias does not.
Section 19(3) — the publisher of an anonymous work
Subject to subsection (2), in the case of an anonymous or pseudonymous work, the publisher whose name appears on the work shall, in the absence of proof to the contrary, be presumed to represent the author and, in that capacity, shall be entitled to exercise and enforce the moral and economic rights of the author — except that when the author reveals his identity, this presumption shall cease to apply.
This is a practical enforcement provision. Where a work is published anonymously, an infringer cannot escape by demanding that the unknown author come forward. The named publisher may bring the proceedings — seeking injunctions and impounding orders under section 26 and damages under section 27.
Note the breadth: the publisher may exercise and enforce the moral and economic rights. That includes the integrity right in section 7(1)(d), which is unusual — moral rights are otherwise personal to the author.
And note the limits. The presumption is of representation, not ownership. It is displaced by proof to the contrary, and it ceases when the author reveals his identity. From that moment the author enforces their own rights.
Revealing identity has a second consequence. Under section 17(4), an anonymous or pseudonymous work is protected for 50 years from making, first availability or first publication, whichever is last — but where the author’s identity is revealed or is no longer in doubt before that period expires, the ordinary term of life plus 50 years applies instead.
So an author writing anonymously has a decision with two effects: staying anonymous keeps the publisher in charge of enforcement and fixes a shorter, event-based term; coming forward restores personal control and, usually, a longer term.
Proving ownership in practice
| Step | Why it helps |
|---|---|
| Put the author’s name on the work, prominently | Engages the section 19(1) presumption — and is itself the section 7(1)(a) moral right |
| Date the work and keep drafts, files and metadata | Establishes when it was made — relevant to section 17(3) and (5) terms, and to who created it first |
| Keep a signed written assignment from any contractor or freelancer | Section 18 gives them ownership; only section 20 writing moves it |
| Record which employee created what, and when | Supports the section 18(4) employer ownership rule — which requires creation in the course of employment |
| For a film, record the producer and the separately exploitable contributions | Section 18(5) splits ownership between producer and contributing authors |
| Keep rights management information in digital copies | Removing or altering it without authority is unlawful under section 29(1)(c) |
| Note the place and date of first publication | Determines whether the Act applies at all under section 3(3) |
Some claimants send themselves a sealed copy of a work by post, or lodge it with a lawyer, in the belief that this creates rights. It does not. Copyright already exists under section 4(2) from the moment of creation.
What such steps can do is provide evidence of date. That is useful, but it is worth less than the simple step section 19(1) rewards: naming the author on the work itself.
Neighbouring rights have no equivalent
Section 19 applies to works. There is no corresponding presumption for performers, producers of sound recordings or broadcasting organisations in Part III.
Those right holders must prove their status directly. For a producer, that means proving they undertook the initiative and responsibility for the making of the recording, which is the section 2 definition — so recording contracts, session agreements and payment records matter. For a performer, it means proving the performance and, where relevant, its fixation. Credits on the packaging, and the rights management information protected by section 29, are the practical substitutes.
Sources
- Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2000 — ss 2, 3, 4, 7, 17–20, 26, 27, 29
- Trade Marks Act (Chapter 385)
Before relying on anything here, read the current text of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act 2000 and check for later amendments. If a decision matters to you, get advice — start with the Office of the Public Solicitor, or find a firm in the law firms directory.