Law Notes Intellectual Property Law Notes
IP law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. These notes cover all the LLB Intellectual Property law cases and so are perfect for anyone doing an LLB in the UK or a great supplement for those doing LLBs abroad, whether that be in Ireland, Hong Kong or Malaysia (University of London).
These were the best IP Law notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through dozens of LLB samples from outstanding law students with the highes...
The following is a more accessible 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:
Expanded from the original copyright under the Statute of Anne (1710) which only prohibited copying
If a new mode of exploitation arises, it must either fit within the existing rights or a new right must be added to the legislation
COMPARE: French approach
2 broad rights of reproduction and performance
No need for regular amendments since these have been interpreted to include new forms of exploitation
For literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, this means “reproducing the work in any material form”
Includes “storing the work in any medium by electronic means”: so digitising the work (e.g. scanning) is copying
For any type of work, includes transient or incidental copying
Considerable disagreement over the status of transient copying as a prohibited act
Some argued that this creates a right of access and is too far-reaching
Litman: “centrality of copying to use of digital technology is precisely why reproduction is no longer an appropriate way to measure infringement”
Makeen: There might be undue overlap with right of communication
NOTE: EU Information Society Directive creates a mandatory exception for transient or incidental copying as part of network transmission or legal use
Implemented in CDPA s28A
Infopaq: This exception only covers copies which are deleted automatically without human intervention
PRCA v NLA [2013] UKSC 18: UKSC held that normal browsing benefits from the temporary copies exception (for copies on the screen and cache)
Confirmed by the CJEU
For artistic works, includes changes of dimension (2D to 3D or vice versa)
Unlikely for change of dimension or material to apply to other types of work
Making a dish based on a recipe is not copying
Autospin (Oil Seals) Ltd v Beehive Spinning [1995] RPC 683
C designed new type of oil seal, produced instruction charts for the calculation of necessary dimensions
D (ex-employees of C) manufactured oil seals which C claimed infringed copyright in their measurement charts
Laddie J: Not reproduction to create an oil seal based on instructions for calculation of measurements in a chart
“just as it cannot be a reproduction of literary copyright in a recipe for a cake to make a cake to the recipe, so it is not a reproduction to follow such mathematical instructions”
ALTHOUGH he left open the possibility that “making a three dimensional article from a data file in a computer (a literary work) which precisely defines the shape of the article is to reproduce it”
Narrowly defined
Applies to literary/dramatic/musical works but NOT artistic works
Includes translation of a literary/dramatic work into another form
Includes arrangement or altered version or translation of a computer program
An adaptation can qualify for its own copyright if it is sufficiently original
Even if it was carried out without permission (ZYX v King, 1995)
Originally only a right of divulgation (right to publish for the first time)
Phillips and Bently: 2 possible interpretations for when “issuing to the public” occurs
Point of disposition (when work is first put into circulation)
S18(2) defines issuing copies to the public as “the act of putting into circulation”
This interpretation supports the distinction between primary infringement (strict liability) and secondary infringement (liability for dealing in infringing copies with knowledge)
CJEU has held that the distribution right is exhausted once the goods are placed on the market in any EU country
Point of destination (when work is actually sold)
Art 4 of the Software Directive refers to “any form of distribution to the public by sale or otherwise” which may not include distributors/wholesalers
This interpretation gives more protection to copyright owners since those further down the distribution chain can be held liable
Avoids an overlap with the reproduction right
English first instance decisions (KK Sony Computer [2006] and Independiente Ltd [2007]) have implicitly accepted this approach
Distribution right for computer programs
Art 4 of Software Directive: includes rental rights
UsedSoft v Oracle (2012): CJEU held that the right is exhausted through authorised downloading from the internet with right to unlimited use in return for a fee
Distribution right for works other than computer programs
Not exhausted unless there is a first sale or ownership transfer with rightholder’s consent (doesn’t include online dissemination)
Applies to literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works (besides architecture and applied art), as well as films as sound recordings
Implantation of Rental and Lending Rights Directive
Rental: “making a copy of the work available for use, on terms that it will or may be returned, for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage”
Lending: Similar but not for economic/commercial advantage, through an establishment accessible to the public
Doesn’t include lending between public establishments (e.g. inter-library loans)
S18A(3): Exclusions
Public performance, exhibition or on-the-spot reference use
Unlike distribution right, not exhausted by distribution of copies or prior rental/lending
Foreningen v Laserdisken (1999): CJEU held that rental right can “be exploited by repeated an potentially unlimited transactions”
When is the performance “in public”?
Harms Ltd and Chappell v Martans Club Ltd [1927] 1 Ch 526
Performance of a musical work at exclusive London club
CA (Lord Hanworth): The performance was in public
Should consider injury to the author, of which profits is a “very important element”
Should consider if there is “admission of any portion of the public”, which refers to the “class of persons who would be likely to go to a performance” at a public theatre for...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Intellectual Property Law Notes.
IP law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambridge. These notes cover all the LLB Intellectual Property law cases and so are perfect for anyone doing an LLB in the UK or a great supplement for those doing LLBs abroad, whether that be in Ireland, Hong Kong or Malaysia (University of London).
These were the best IP Law notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through dozens of LLB samples from outstanding law students with the highes...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started