Deck 1 - CR Flashcards
Art. 5 (2) Berne Convention
CR is an unregistered right – arises automatically w/out formalities
TRIPS Art 9 (2)
CR protection shall extend to expression, not ideas, procedures, modus operandi or maths concepts
Jeffery’s v. Boosey
UK CR protection doesn’t include ideas ‘the claim is not to ideas but to the order of words…’ Erle J.
Nova v. Mazooma
2007 – IDEAS are not protected – Nova had emulated but not copied any code and was thus legitimate;
Video Games are not dramatic works
SAS v. World Programming
2010 – Arnold J – replicating functionality ≠ infringe CR – are Programming languages/interfaces/functions CR protected?
Elanco v Mandrops
1979 – weedkiller instructions – D sold similar product with similar leaflet to C – CA granted injunction Lord Goff saying D should have used publically available info & that would have been OK
Common Law CR model
Concerned with:
Encouraging production of new works;
Indifference to authors – UK law presumes an employer is first owner made by employee;
limited legal restrictions on alienability;
half-hearted recognition of moral rights;
Berne Convention
Protection w/out formalities (reg’tion);
Term of protection = life + 70 years
Trade Related Aspects of IP Rights (TRIPS)
Aims = Non-discrimination; Equality of treatment; Transparency; Establishes minimum standards for protection; No Enforcement;
WIPO
Introduced internet treaties / failed in trying to update Berne to Modern day;
Universal CR Convention (UCC)
Gave us CR symbol;
Need : symbol, name, year of 1st publication for protection;
No formalities;
Info. Society Directive 2001
Brings EU CR rules into digital era;
Establishes rights of:
1) Reproduction;
2) Communication to public/making available;
3) Attempt to harmonise exceptions to CR
NB/ mandatory Exception = internet cookies
CDPA 1988
Gives exhaustive list of types of creation automatically protected by CR law;
PROB – closed list of categories = CR has to be stretched to give protection to creative expressions the protection wasn’t contemplated for.
Creation records v News Group
artistic photo for album cover (Gallagher) not fall into list of protected work;
Lancome v Kecofa
Dutch supreme CRT protected perfumes by CR – not possible under UK law.
Electronic Technique v Critchley
1997 – Laddie J – Circuit diagram could not be both Literary and Artistic
Norowzian v Arks
2000 – CA – accepted that the maker of a film may produce 2 CR works – A film CR & a dramatic work in the ‘cinematographic’
S.3 CDPA
Definition of a Literary Work;
S. 172 CDPA
Amends CR act 1956
S. 179 CDPA
Definition of ‘writing’ – any form of notation or code, whether by hand or otherwise regardless of method/medium it is recorded on
Uni. London Press v. Uni Tute Press
Literary works ≠ limited to works of literature
Def. Of ‘written’ highlights that aesthetic or qualitative criteria are irrelevant when it comes to Id’ing literary work;
Maths exams = original literary works for CR protection
Express Newspapers v Liverpool Daily Post
Creating the sequences of letters set out in 5x5 grids published in a newspaper involved skill and labour and provided info. as to whether a reader had won or lost a bingo game so work.
Criticism: Dangerous as drifting towards protecting the ideas themselves. Just result though