Intellectual Property Law

Running head: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW
Intellectual Property Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW1
Appendix 2
To: Polymer Records
From: Legal Advisor
Date: 12 April 2019
Subject: Advice on Copyright Ownership and Infringement issue
A copyright is an intangible property which subsists in terms of certain subject
matters. In the UK, it is governed by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. As held in
the Berne Convention, Article 5(2), copyright exists even when there is no registration of it.
The copyright law in the UK covers copyright protection of the following first subclasses: a)
original literary works; b) original dramatic works; c) original musical works; and d) original
musical works. The copyright protection is given to the creator of the original work who is
presumed to be the first owner (GOV.UK 2019). However, if an original work was created in
the course of employment, then the owner or creator of such work will be considered by the
employer of such creator. In case of joint authorship, the people collaborating of creating the
work would be regarded as the creator of the said work (Bently 2009). As per the UK
copyright law, a person may assign his copyright rights to some other person, for example in
book publishing business or in case of music recording company (GOV.UK 2019).
In this situation, Nigel has created the hit songs in the course of his employment under
the Polymer Records which makes the Polymer records the owner and creator of the hit
songs, even though they were originally created by Nigel. He conducted the service in the
course of his employment that does not give him the right to use or share those songs without
the permission of his employer who is the rightful ‘creator’ of the songs (Bently 2009). Here,
Polymer Records would be eligible to sue Nigel if he share the work with anyone who has no

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW2
authority over it (Rahmatian 2013). In this case, although Nigel had written the songs in his
spare time for his rock band, yet as he delivered them to his employer in the course of his
employment for saving his job, he would no longer be the creator of the songs. Polymer
Records can sue Nigel if he share the songs with his previous band members for any purpose
(Bently 2009).
Polymer Records would be eligible to sue David for he infringed the company’s
copyright right for recording another version of a song without the permission of the
company. The company being the owner and creator of the song deserved to be informed
before he wished to record the song. However, David may defend himself on the ground that
he held the songs with him as a member of the same rock band as Nigel, before Nigel gave
the songs to Polymer Records. In such situation, David would be able to defend himself and
the blame would be shifted to Nigel’s court for delivering a work which was no more
‘original’ and was already shared with the world. Polymer Records would, in any way, be
able to sue either of the parties, that is David or Nigel for the infringement of their copyright
rights (GOV.UK 2019).
Although Nigel can try to defend himself by stating that it was collaborative joint
creation with his rock band members, he would still be sued for sharing a song which is not
‘original’ and unknown to the world, in that case. Polymer Records would be successful to
sue either of the parties and claim damages for copyright infringement (GOV.UK 2019).
Therefore, it is advised to Polymer Records to address the ownership of the song that
has been used by David without the permission of Polymer Records. The company can
establish the fact through its employee Nigel as to time when he actually wrote it; in the
course of his employment or otherwise. The company can ask Nigel to prove whether he had
shared the song with his band members before or after he delivered the songs to the company
to save his position. In case Nigel accept the fact that he had written the songs outside his