This is an extract of our Copyright Authorship Term 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:
AUTHORSHIP Important concept?Determines who holds the rights Can affect whether a work qualifies for copyright protection Affects the term of protection (70 years after death)
INTERNATIONAL No definition in Berne ConventionBut can infer that authors of literary and artistic works must be natural persons o Since the works must be intellectual creations of the author and the author must have a lifespan else the term could not be calculated
UK CDPA s9(1): Author is the person who creates the work?
i.e. contributes the originality Walter v Lane (1900): Since the reporter expended skill and effort in transposing Lord Rosebery's speech into writing, he was an author of a copyright work
CDPA s9(2)??Author of Sound recording is producer (s9(2)(aa)) Film: producer AND principal director (s9(2)(ab)) o Principal director added in because of a EU Harmonising Directive Broadcast: person making the broadcast (s9(2)(b)) Typographical arrangement: publisher (s9(2)(d)) Definition of producer: "person by whom the arrangements necessary for the making of the sound recording or film are undertaken" (s178) o Bamgboye v Reed (2004): Producer is determined by who provided the financial arrangements or instigated the process
S104-105: Evidential PresumptionsAny name listed as author on (or in) the work is presumed to be correct unless the contrary is proved
JOINT AUTHORSHIP CDPA s10(1): Works of joint authorship are produced by collaboration where "the contribution of each is not distinct from that of the other author or authors"Results in joint authorship and joint ownership (affects the rights of each owner)
ROBIN RAY V CLASSIC FM [ FSR 622C was hired by D as consultant to advice on repertoire and catalogue its library
C's catalogue (using his own factors, including a "tingle" factor) was later used in D's automatic database which D licenced to foreign stations D claimed that they could exploit the work, C disagreed Lightman J: D didn't have the right to licence the database o Even if D had been a joint author, it was a tenant in common and therefore could not do any restricted acts without consent of ALL the co-owners o?
FISHER V BROOKER  UKHL 41 o o
C brought a claim of joint authorship of the musical work due to his organ part UKHL: C's organ part and the solo qualified as an "original contribution" to the work so C was given 40% copyright over the work
? Not estopped from asserting copyright even though it was already 40 years after the work was created NOTE: Unlike Godfrey v Lees (1995) where C was estopped from revoking the implied licence of a work created 14 years ago (because it was a harsher claim?)
REQUIREMENT OF CONTRIBUTION BRIGHTON V JONES  EWHC 1157?D had written the script of the play and C had directed the first production C claimed joint authorship from contributions and suggestions made during rehearsals regarding changes to plot and dialogue Park J: C was not a joint author, identified 3 requirements o Contribution of a joint author need not be equal but must be significant o The contribution must be "towards the creation of the work"
? Any other contribution, even if significant, is insufficient o Joint author need not "put pen to paper" himself o In this case, burden of proof was on C since D was listed as sole author on the script itself (s104 presumption)
? C contributed to the "interpretation and theatrical presentation" and not the creation of the dramatic work which D had already written beforehand
REQUIREMENT OF COLLABORATIONBeckingham v Hodgens  EWCA Civ 143 o C contributed the violin part of a song o CA: Joint authorship does not require "the existence of a common intention as to joint authorship", as long as there is a "common design to produce the work"
REQUIREMENT OF "NOT DISTINCT"?
Example of separate contributions: each author contributes a different chapter to a book US requires that the contribution be "merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole"
S10A: CO -AUTHORSHIP?NEW introduction (Nov 2013, based on EU Directive) Different from joint authorship Covers a collaboration of musical and literary works that are "created in order to be used together"
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Intellectual Property Law Notes.