A more recent version of these Copyright Qualifying Person notes – written by Oxford students – is available here.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Intellectual Property Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
2. Qualifying Person A work will qualify for copyright protection if, at the material time, the author was a qualifying person. A qualifying person is either:
i) A British citizen; ii) An individual domiciled or resident in the UK or another country to which the relevant provisions of this Part extend;
iii) A body incorporated under the law of a part of the UK or of another country to which the relevant provisions of this Part extend or are applied. S.154(4): 'Material time' for literary, dramatic, or artistic works is, for unpublished works, when the work was made and, for published works, when the work was first published. S.154(5): In the case of sound recordings, films and broadcasts the 'material time' is when the work was made. For typological arrangements it is when the edition was first published. Authorship 'Author': S.9(1) CDPA stipulates that it is 'the person who creates the work'. Clear link between authorship and originality - person who contributes relevant skill and labour will be the person who creates the work, thus its author. S.9(2) CDPA: 'Author' means the producer for sound recordings, the person making the broadcast in broadcasts, the publisher in the case of typological arrangements, and the principal director and producer in the case of films. The significance of authorship:
? A 'qualifying person' is linked to authorship in the case of literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works.
? For literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, the term of protection is calculated post mortem auctoris; i.e. 70 years after the death of the author.
? The author of a work will be its first owner according to s.11(1) CDPA.
? Elaboration upon who can be a 'producer':
- Bamgboye v. Reed  EMLR 5; Facts: Disputed ownership of copyright in musical work and sound recording of a song called 'Bouncing Flow'. C worked as a trainee tape operator and sound engineer at the recording studio and had contributed drum and cymbal effects. After track was recorded D used equipment at Mr B's home to further work on and master the recording. Decision: Williamson QC held that Mr B was a joint author of the musical work, but in relation to the sound recording she found that Mr R was the producer. She decided that 'the real question is who instigated the relevant recording and organised the activity necessary for its making?' Mr R arranged to get Mr B to make his house and equipment available so Mr R was the producer in 'substance' - this was not a joint operation. Presumptions: S.104(2)(a) CDPA: In the case of literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works, where a name purporting to be that of the author appears on copies of the work, the person named shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, to be the author of the work'.
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Intellectual Property Law Notes.