The testimony as it happened... 
								(05.11.2013, 3:30pm) António Paulo Antunes 
								dos Santos is a Lawyer and post-graduate in 
								Communication Law specialising in the field of 
								Intellectual Property Rights. He is currently 
								the Chief Executive of the Federação Editores 
								de Videogramas (FEVIP), a Portuguese 
								Association which represents the interests of 
								its affiliate members in the coordination of the 
								national programme against audiovisual piracy. 
								He is also a former Polícia Judiciária 
								Inspector. 
								Up until 2009, VCFilmes was an affiliate 
								member of FEVIP. 
								The Judge Maria Emília de Avillez Melo e 
								Castro – Do you know what this trial is about?
								
								
								AS says he remembers the issue of the 
								Providência Cautelar (Injunction hearing). 
								The Judge – Do you know Gonçalo Amaral? 
								
								AS says he does, they were colleagues in 
								the Policia Judiciaria for some years and they 
								occasionally talk to each other. He adds that, 
								as a juridical consultant, he helped GA 
								concerning the contract with G&P and the rights 
								related to the documentary's production by 
								VCFilmes. 
								
								The defence lawyer for VCFilmes, Dr. Henrique 
								Costa Pinto, is the only lawyer to question the 
								witness. 
								
								VC - Did you know GA before the book 
								was published? 
								
								AS answers that he met GA at the PJ. 
								Though their areas were different, they worked 
								together for some time and had a good 
								relationship. He says that he left the PJ in 
								1991 in order to lead a program for the 
								protection of authors against the violation of 
								their rights. 
								VC - Do you know the book by Gonçalo Amaral?
								
								
								AS says he does. 
								VC - This book was the basis for a 
								documentary, it was adapted into a film that was 
								broadcast by TVI Have you watched it? 
								
								AS says he did. He adds that he bought 
								the DVD with a copy of the Correio da Manhã. 
								VC - Do you remember when that was? 
								
								AS says it was in 2009. 
								VC - Apart from the version broadcast by TVI, 
								have you knowledge of any copy made of this 
								audio visual work? 
								
								AS – No legal one. He adds that an 
								illegal reproduction appeared on the Internet on 
								a certain site. He says that a complaint was 
								lodged with the PJ. 
								VC - Was it a Portuguese site? 
								
								AS says he doesn't know who the webmaster 
								was, but that the site was a Portuguese. He adds 
								that the pirated copy had subtitles in English.
								
								VC - Did VCFilmes put this documentary 
								on-line? 
								
								AS says that they didn't, they were the 
								victims of a fraud and started an action against 
								the hackers. 
								VC - Did your association (FEVIP) protest 
								against foreign sites? 
								
								AS says "no". 
								VC - Was VCFilmes damaged in the process? 
								
								AS - Of course they were. If people have 
								free access to the documentary on the Web, it 
								represents a significant loss of clients. 
								VC - Are you sure that VCFilmes didn't 
								authorise this? 
								
								AS - Absolutely. 
								VC - Have you some knowledge of the Criminal 
								Process in the Madeleine case? 
								
								AS says he knows some parts of it but 
								none in particular. 
								VC - Have you seen, in the documentary, parts 
								that weren't in the Criminal Inquiry? 
								
								AS answers "no". 
								VC - What about the facts themselves? 
								
								AS says he doesn't know the details, but 
								he thinks that what is in the book is in the 
								Criminal Inquiry. He adds that GA's book 
								analyses the case from the perspective of the 
								investigator, namely, Gonçalo Amaral. 
								VC - But this perspective ended up not being 
								confirmed. 
								
								AS says he doesn't understand what the 
								lawyer means. 
								VC - What is the conclusion of the book? 
								
								AS - The evidence established at that 
								determinate time allowed for some conclusions. 
								The shelving of the case was months afterwards. 
								The book, which was published afterwards, might 
								have divergence points, but it clearly states 
								that there is case for further investigations.
								
								
								Evidence ends.