Local authorities ran classes in which aerobics teachers used music for lessons. No licence was obtained for the performance of the music. They claimed to be ‘a club, society or other organisation the main objects of which were charitable or otherwise concerned with the advancement of religion, education or social welfare.’ In effect this was … Continue reading Phonographic Performance Ltd v South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council: ChD 23 Nov 2000
The claimant represented the interests of copyright holders, and complained that the defendant had failed to implement the Directive properly, leaving them unable properly to collect royalties in the music rental market. The respondent argued that . .
The prosecutor appealed dismissal of a charge of receiving a broadcast television programme with intent to avoid payment. The defendant ran a public house. She acquired a card which allowed her to receive transmissions from a Greek satellite broadcasting premier league football matches. The intellectual property rights to such matches in the UK lay with … Continue reading Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd: Admn 21 Dec 2007
The claimant appealed against rejection of their claim for copyright infringement. The defendant supplied decoders for European satellite feeds to publicans of transmissions of games from Europe wihin the UK. Held: The appeal failed. Judges: Etherton, Lewison, Munby LJJ Citations: [2012] EWCA Civ 1708, [2013] BUS LR 866, [2012] WLR(D) 392 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: … Continue reading Football Association Premier League Ltd v QC Leisure and Others: CA 20 Dec 2012
A logo had been created for the claimants, by an independent sub-contractor. They sought assignment of their legal title, but, knowing of the claimant’s interest the copyright was assigned to a third party out of the jurisdiction. The claimant sought an order for its transfer, and an order was so made. Before it was perfected … Continue reading R Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others (No 2): ChD 12 May 2004
The defendant sought summary judgment saying that the claim was doomed to fail. The claimants alleged copyright infringement in the rebroadcasting by the defendants of their materials. Judges: Kitchin J Citations: [2010] EWHC 3063 (Ch) Links: Bailii Statutes: Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 6, Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003 (SI 2003/2498), Directive 2001/29/EC … Continue reading ITV Broadcasting Ltd and Others v TV Catch Up Ltd: ChD 25 Nov 2010
The defendants appealed a finding that they had infringed the claimant’s unregistered design rights in collapsible umbrellas. The defendants said the law protected only the design as a whole, and that only part had been copied. Held: Authority was clear that subject to considerations as to the non-protection of ‘must fit/must match elements’ of a … Continue reading A Fulton Company Limited v Totes Isotoner (UK) Limited: CA 4 Nov 2003
Dispute over the authorship of the screenplay of a film. Held: ‘the judgment cannot stand. The judge has adopted an erroneous approach to the evidence, failed to make important findings of primary fact, failed to take account of material matters and applied incorrect legal standards to the assessment of the sufficiency of Ms Kogan’s contributions. … Continue reading Kogan v Martin and Others: CA 9 Oct 2019
The claimant, during his career had written private diaries, including minutes of secret political meetings. As he stepped down from leadership, he began to arrange publication. Before this was complete, the defendant published extracts. He complained of breach of copyright. Held: The claim succeeded. The VC granted a final injunction against any further infringement and … Continue reading Ashdown v Telegraph Group Ltd: ChD 11 Jan 2001
The defendant newspaper appealed summary judgment against it for breach of confidence and copyright infringement having published the claimant’s journals which he said were private. Held: Upheld, although the judge had given insufficient weight to the fact that the information was received under an express obligation of confidence. The court recognised that a duty of … Continue reading Associated Newspapers Ltd v Prince of Wales: CA 21 Dec 2006
An advertising agency was requested to provide a logo. It employed an independent designer. Who owned the copyright, in this case of the AirWair logo? The defendants had taken an assignment of the copyright from the first author. The claimants sought a declaration as to its ownership. Held: It was possible for copyright and trade … Continue reading R Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others: ChD 2 Dec 2003
A film whose defining and innovative characteristic was the editing which produced stylised jumps in the action, which were incapable of performance by the actor, was not a dramatic work protected by copyright. A film per se cannot be a dramatic work within the meaning of the 1988 Act, though it can be a recording … Continue reading Norowzian v Arks Limited and Others: ChD 17 Jul 1998
The complainant alleged breach of their registered design for a flask. Whether the designs are substantially different is for the court on a comparison of the features judged eye. The court represents a customer interested in the design. It can look at available design if the design of the registered design only differs from the … Continue reading Thermos Limited v Aladdin Sales and Marketing Limited: CA 10 May 2001
Car parts which had no effect on appearance and were merely parts were not registerable as Registered Designs.The section applies only to items of design which will have their own independent use, and not only as part of a larger item. Registration was refused for the part in this case. Judges: Lord Keith, Lord Ackner, … Continue reading Regina v Registered Designs Appeal Tribunal, Ex Parte Ford Motor Company Ltd: HL 14 Dec 1994
The claimant film artist showed a film to an advertising agency, who did not make use of it, but later appeared to use techniques and styles displayed in the film in subsequent material sold to third parties. Held: A film was protected as a dramatic work subject to copyright law, but not the artistic techniques … Continue reading Mehdi Norowzian v Arks Ltd and Guinness Brewing Worldwide Limited (No 2): CA 11 Nov 1999
The BBC’s appeal failed. Section 228 of the 1988 Act is intended to protect those who do no more than re-broadcast or retransmit, while not necessarily being copyright owners of a broadcast in their own right. Citations: (1991) 21 IPR 461, [1991] 3 WLR 1, [1992] RPC 167, [1991] 3 All ER 257, [1991] 2 … Continue reading BBC Enterprises Ltd v Hi-Tech Xtravision Ltd: HL 1991
The appellants resisted disclosure to the revenue of advice it had received. It claimed legal advice privilege (LAP), though the advice was from its accountants. Held: (Lords Sumption and Clarke dissenting) LAP applies to all communications passing between a client and its lawyers, acting in their professional capacity, in connection with the provision of legal … Continue reading Prudential Plc and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Commissioner of Income Tax and Another: SC 23 Jan 2013
Insufficient Evidence to say Song was Copied S sought a declaration that he had not copied the defendant’s song with his own. The court examined the musical details of both songs. Held: The song was not copied. The defendant had not shown that the claimant knew anything of the defendant’s song ‘Oh Why’. The fact … Continue reading Sheeran and Others v Chokri and Others: ChD 6 Apr 2022
The claimant newspapers complained of the spidering of the web-sites and redistribution of the materials collected by the defendants to its subscribers. The defendants including the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) denied that they needed a licence for the purpose. Held: The members of PRCA required licences from the claimants in order lawfully to receive … Continue reading The Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd and Others v Meltwater Holding Bv and Others: ChD 26 Nov 2010
The claimant sought return of items removed by the defendants under the 1984 Act. A decision had been made against a prosecution by the police. The police wished to hold onto the items to allow a decision from the second defendant. Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. The offence allowed an officer to seize material found … Continue reading Scopelight Ltd and Others v Chief of Police for Northumbria: CA 5 Nov 2009
How much new material for new copyright (Hong Kong) Toy building bricks were manufactured by Lego in accordance with engineering drawings made for that purpose. One issue was whether new drawings made since 1972, altering the original drawings in various minor respects but added new information addressed to the purchaser in the form of written … Continue reading Interlego AG v Tyco Industries Inc: PC 5 May 1988
The claimant sought a share in the royalties from the song ‘A whiter shade of pale’ but had delayed his claim for 38 years. He had contributed the organ solo which had contributed significantly to the song’s success. He now sought a share of future royalties. Held: His appeal was allowed. Limitation did not apply, … Continue reading Fisher v Brooker and Others: HL 30 Jul 2009
Novelty was claimed in shape or configuration of the brassiere the subject of the registration. Held; Under the law of registered designs, the designer had to state in what respect he claimed novelty – was it shape, configuration pattern or . .
Lord Templeman said: ‘The appellants’ submissions are, in essence, based on the proposition that if a product is worth copying, the law should protect the product against being copied. My Lords, that is not the law. In British Leyland Motor . .
The design in question consisted of a drawing or picture of a nipple, such as was used for the purpose of lubricating the bearings of automobiles. It was submitted for the plaintiff that if a design had utility, it might still be registered under . .
The order at first instance was discharged ‘without prejudice to any question so that it cannot be used as a precedent’ . .
A drawing of a letter could be both the subject matter of copyright and protected under the Patents and Designs Act 1907. . .
One plaintiff was the exclusive licensee of a registered design. The defendant sold articles alleged to infringe the design right. The registered owner had a statutory right to sue for infringement. But the question was whether the licensee could . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
