Lego had expired patent and design rights on its bricks. In 1972, Lego redrew the design drawings for its bricks – with substantial features of the previous design kept, and the only main changes being to the written information on the drawing which were of technical importance for manufacturing purposes. D made and sold bricks in Hong Kong which were compatible with those of Lego, by copying principal features of Lego’s design. Issue was whether post-1972 drawings had copyright.
· Skill, labour or judgment merely in process of copying does not confer originality.
· Thus an exact copy is not original, even if making it required skill or labour.
Ø copy must contain some alteration or addition to the earlier work.
· Whether addition is sufficient is question of degree having regard to quality of addition.
Ø And not the quantity.
Ø Thus even relatively small addition may suffice.
· Is no universal test of originality.
Ø i.e. test in William Hillcannot be applied to all copyright cases.
· On facts, graphical drawings were not original.
· A photo of an existing painting (or painting of an existing photo)does not have copyright.
· Despite skill required in making the copy of the original photo/painting, the copy painting or photo are unoriginal.