Nintendo Company Ltd and Another v Playables Ltd and Another: ChD 28 Jul 2010

The claimant said that the defendant was marketing an anti-copyright protection device, and now sought summary judgment.
Held: A partial settlement having been reached, the court should be particularly careful with an unopposed application. Even so the defendant had no realistic prospect of succeeding in his defence at trial, given the decisions in Sony -v- Ball, and Regina -v- Higgs. Summary judgment was granted.
Floyd J
[2010] EWHC 1932 (Ch), [2010] ECDR 14, [2011] Bus LR D89, [2010] FSR 36
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 296ZD 296
England and Wales
CitedKabushiki Kaisha Sony Computer Entertainment Inc., Sony Computer Entertainment Europe Limited, Sony Computer Entertainment UK Limited v Ball, and others ChD 19-Jul-2004
The claimant sought summary judgment in a claim that the defendant had manufactured computer chips which would be used with their playstation computer games consoles to avoid their copy protection systems.
Held: The fact that the chips only . .
CitedHiggs v Regina CACD 24-Jun-2008
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the section. He ran a business fitting modifying chips to games consoles allowing them to play non-certificated games CDs.
Held: The appeal was allowed. It was not suggested that the use of a . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 March 2021; Ref: scu.421123