Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Confetti Records v Warner Music UK Ltd

[2003] EWHC (Ch) 1274

Case summary last updated at 29/01/2020 18:59 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Confetti Records v Warner Music UK Ltd

C composed garage track. D had been in negotiations to use track on a compilation album, but deal fell through late in day – by which time D had already mixed album. C’s work was used as backing track over which rappers employed by D rapped lyrics. C claimed derogatory treatment in light of fact that lyrics were suggestive of violence and drug usage, and fact the C’s original work had been distorted beyond recognition. Held:
 
·        Section 80(2) requires that mutilation or distortion of C’s work is only derogatory if prejudicial to honour or reputation of C
Ø  i.e. this inferred from use of ‘or otherwise prejudicial’
·       On facts, no derogatory treatment
Ø  Mere distortion of music does not suffice
Ø  Lyrics in question were not offensive
·       Most importantly, was no evidence that what had happened had caused any prejudice to C’s honour or reputation

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Intellectual Property Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Intellectual Property Law Notes

Intellectual Property Law Notes >>