Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Justifications, Copyright 1 (Subsistence) Cases

Law Notes > Intellectual Property Law Notes

This is an extract of our Justifications, Copyright 1 (Subsistence) Cases document, which we sell as part of our Intellectual Property Law Notes collection written by the top tier of Oxford students.

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:

JUSTIFICATIONS, COPYRIGHT 1 (SUBSISTENCE) Subsistence of Copyright Literary Work New Technology Nova Productions v Mazooma Games [2006] (Chancery Court) C, a games manufacturer, had copyright in a computer game based upon pool. Alleged that D had infringed this copyright through the development of its own games, in form of: i) literary works (the original game designer's notes and program he wrote to develop the game; and ii) dramatic works (the visual experience provided by the game). iii)artistic works (the bitmap graphics and frames generated and displayed to the user); was alleged that the combined effect of a number of freeze frame graphics was mimicked in the later game, and that this effect constituted an artistic work. Held: Chancery Court 1) Source code for producing a game constitutes a literary work. 2) The game itself is not a dramatic work i) Is not intended to be performed in front of an audience
- Rather, what happens in the game depends upon the player's actions ii) The features of the game alleged to be copied are also not capable of performance CofA 3) The series of still images do not constitute a graphic work.
? Only one still image alone can constitute a graphic work.
? Hence a series of static images cannot constitute a graphic work (and therefore an artistic work).
? Parliament obviously created copyright for moving images under the notion of copyright in film in CDPA 1988. Requirements University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916]
Issue was whether mathematical examination papers were 'literary works'. Held:

*

*

Style/level of quality of creation is irrelevant to whether it is literary work.
? Thus aesthetic or qualitative judgments should not be made when identifying whether something is literary work Thus a mathematical exam paper is capable of being literary work.

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Intellectual Property Law Notes.

More Intellectual Property Law Samples