Research Project: Copyright Infringement Analysis and Remedies

This research project provides a comprehensive overview of copyright law and intellectual property rights, focusing on the legal aspects of copyright infringement and available remedies. It analyzes relevant laws, including the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, and explores key concepts such as copying, illegal appropriation, and standards of evidence. The study examines significant case laws, including Gyles v Wilcox and Designer Guild Limited v Russell Williams (Textile) Limited, to illustrate the application of copyright principles in different contexts. It also addresses the challenges posed by digital piracy and freebooting in the age of social media. The research aims to identify loopholes and grey areas in copyright law and proposes recommendations for strengthening copyright protection and enforcement. This project offers a critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of copyright laws, providing valuable insights into the legal issues and remedial measures related to copyright infringement.

1
Copyright Infringement: A research study

2
Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................3
Aims and objectives...................................................................................................................3
Research Questions....................................................................................................................3
Literature review........................................................................................................................3
Case laws....................................................................................................................................4
Concepts governing copyright infringement..............................................................................6
Copying and illegal appropriation..........................................................................................6
Direct demonstration of replication.......................................................................................7
Indirect evidence of replication..............................................................................................7
Clarification................................................................................................................................8
Standards of evidence............................................................................................................8
Methods of the research.........................................................................................................8
Recommendations......................................................................................................................9
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................9
Bibliography.............................................................................................................................10

3
Introduction
The research is purported to the providing of an overview in relation to the laws pertinent to
copyright as far as the intellectual property rights are concerned. Such laws would be
analyzed accordingly with regard to the strengths and weaknesses of the issues related to
copyright along with the arguments and the ideas in order to conduct the research in a proper
and appropriate manner. A critical analysis of the current trends involved in copyright laws
would also be done accordingly in order to present an assessment accordingly. A literature
review would be done in order to present an analysis and the literature gaps are to be
identified accordingly with regard to copyright infringement.
Aims and objectives
The main aim of the research is to analyze the aspect of copyright infringement in terms of
the legal issues involved as far as the remedial measures are concerned. The aims of the
research also imply the addressing of the loopholes and grey areas pertaining to the research.
The objectives of the research are as follows:
 To address the questions arising out of the research in a desired manner.
 To analyze the concept of copyright infringement in a proper and appropriate manner.
Research Questions
What are the kinds of work that can be protected under the ambit of copyright?
What are the legalities involved in copyright infringement?
What are the remedies for infringement of copyright?
Literature review
Copyright is that branch of intellectual property law which involves the right of the person
who has undertaken and carried out the work in its original form in a creative manner thereby
determining the authenticity of the work. The concept related to copyright evolved as a result
of the advent of the printing press. In order to prevent copyright infringement with reference
to books, the Licensing of the Press Act of 1662 was passed by the Parliament of England. In
order to grant rights to the publishers for a certain period of time, the Statute of Anne was

4
passed by the Parliament of Great Britain1. The Statute of Anne is popularly known as the
Copyright Act of 1710 as it is the first copyright law to be exercised by courts as per their
jurisdiction and the government2. At present, the legal issues related to copyright
infringement are governed by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. The main
people who are entitled as per copyright laws are writers and musicians in order to protect
their originality relating to the works composed by them. If any work is composed from the
original work without the approval of permission of the original person, then it is bound to be
infringement of copyright. Filming is also covered under copyright along with any broadcast.
Additionally, art and literature is also subject to copyright. Many educational institutions
have inculcated the idea of checking the originality of the work submitted by students in
order to detect plagiarism. The concept of plagiarism implies the infringement of the
copyright of the original author. Since the enforcement of the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act of 1988, there have been various amendments primarily from the directives
passed by the European Union and the judgements delivered in various case laws which have
set precedents. The restrictions to undertake some kinds of actions with regard to copyright
are implied by Section 16 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. The aspect of
copyright implies that the quality is of more importance in comparison to quantity as far as
the outcomes are concerned. In order to elucidate upon copyright infringement, there should
be duplication and replication of the content substantially and the content must be eligible to
be protected under copyright. The work of the original author is to be emphasized upon in
order to determine and identify the aspect of copyright infringement3. Besides plagiarism,
theft and piracy of artistic works, most notably music involves copyright infringement. Due
to the popularity of social media in the recent past, the concept of freebooting has emerged
which means unauthorized downloading or copying of social media content. It also
constitutes copyright infringement. There are conventions related to protection of copyright at
the international level which include the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights of 1994 and the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary Artistic
1 Licensing of the Press Act 1662
2 Copyright Act 1710
3 Craig Joyce, Tyler T. Ochoa, Michael W. Carroll, Marshall A. Leaffer, and Peter Jaszi. Copyright law. (4th
edn. Carolina Academic Press, 2016).

5
Works. The issues related to copyright infringement are to be dealt in such manner so that the
originality of the work is to be protected in the desired manner as per the rights of the author.
Case laws
One of the earliest cases with regard to copyright infringement is Gyles v Wilcox4. In this
case, the doctrine of fair abridgement was set by the Court of Chancery as implied by the
opinion of Lord Hardwicke who concluded that the abridgement of Fletcher Gyles’ book by
Barrow, a writer hired by Wilcox and Nutt publishers did not constitute any kind of
infringement of the original work. It is implied form the case that fair abridgement and
copyright infringement are entirely different aspects. Courts have referred to this case with
regard to concluding upon judgement.
In the case of Kenrick v Lawrence, a company was engaged in carrying out work related to
the drawing of a design which would be used in voter cards to help the ones who are illiterate
for the purpose of casting their votes in a proper and appropriate manner5. A rival company
was sued by the company for carrying out similar kinds of drawings even though it was not
identical to the original drawing. In this case, it was held by the Queens’ Bench that the
higher level of protection of copyright is to be granted for broader work.
In the case of LB (Plastics) Ltd. v. Swish Products Ltd, the legal issue which was raised
pertained to the depiction of a drawing of an object in the form of a physical object as to
copyright infringement6. In this case, it was held by the House of Lords that such an aspect
leads to copyright infringement in instances when a person reasonably understands that the
physical object is the one that was implied by the drawing.
In the case of Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Limited7, a suit was
filed by Exxon Corp against Exxon Insurance Consultants International Limited on grounds
4 Gyles v Wilcox (1740) 26 ER 489
5 Kenrick v Lawrence (1890) L.R. 25, Q.B.D. 99
6 LB (Plastics) Ltd. v. Swish Products Ltd [1979] F.S.R. 145 (H.L.)
7 Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Limited [1981] 3 All E.R. 241

6
of not only copyright infringement but also trademark infringement. In this case, it was held
by the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales that there is no instance of
any kind of copyright infringement where name is involved. The Civil Division of the Court
of Appeal of England and Wales further decided that there is no trademark infringement
unless the offender holds some part of the shares in the particular segment of the market in
question.
In the case of Designer Guild Limited v Russell Williams (Textile) Limited, Designer Guild
Limited filed a suit against Russell Williams (Textile) Limited on grounds of copyright
infringement8. In this case, Lord Hoffman of the House of Lords observed that the Court of
Appeal of England and Wales made a grievous error of law by setting aside the decision of
the Chancery Division where it was held that Russell Williams (Textile) Limited’s Margurite
design contained a substantial part of Designer Guild Limited’s Ixia design, under which
Designer Guild Limited held a copyright. These designs contained flowers and stripes.
In the case of Lucasfilm Limited v Ainsworth, the dispute pertained to production of the
costumes of the Stormtrooper character of Lucasfilm by sculptor Andrew Ainsworth9. In this
case, it was held by the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom that the functional props such
as helmets of Stormtrooper cannot be categorized as a sculpture as per the provisions
enshrined and envisaged in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. With reference
to the averment of Andrew Ainsworth regarding copyright claim overseas, the Supreme
Court of the United Kingdom held that a court in the United Kingdom does not have any
jurisdiction in this aspect.
In the case of Templeton Island Collections Limited v New English Teas Limited, Templeton
Island Collections Limited filed a suit against New English Teas Limited on grounds of
copyright infringement of artistic work10. In this case, it was held by the Patents County Court
8 Designer Guild Limited v Russell Williams (Textile) Limited [2001] E.C.D.R. 10
9 Lucasfilm Limited v Ainsworth [2011] UKSC 39
10 Templeton Island Collections Limited v New English Teas Limited [2011] EWPCC 21

7
of England and Wales that a substantial part of the artistic work of Templeton Island
Collections Limited has been replicated by New English Teas Limited. As a result, the
judgment was ruled by Judge Colin Birss (Queens’ Counsel) in favor of Templeton Island
Collections Limited.
Concepts governing copyright infringement
Copying and illegal appropriation
The aspect of copying means the reproduction of the original work. It constitutes copyright
infringement if it is done without the permission of the person to whom the original
ownership rights belong to. The aspect of substantial similarity is the key thing in this regard
to detect the copied content with reference to copyright infringement. In the United Kingdom,
the issues related to copyright infringement are addressed by the application of the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act of 198811. Section 17 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of
1988 that copying constitutes the offence of constitutes copyright infringement as far as
violation of the rights of the owner of the copyright is concerned. As implied from Section 18
of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988, issuing any kind of copy of the original
work to the general public also constitutes copyright infringement as far as violation of the
rights of the owner of the copyright is concerned. Copying in contravention of the rights of
the copyright owner also implies the depiction of the original work in any form as per Section
21 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. Illegal appropriation means the
unfairness involved in the approval of the work without taking into account the original
aspect of the work. The expression of ideas in an original form does not lead to illegal
appropriation as held by the Lord Hoffman in the case of Designer Guild Limited v Russell
Williams (Textile) Limited. It is implied that while copying may be mitigated if it is carried
out with the consent of the person who is the original owner of the copyright, illegal
appropriation cannot be exempted as it is done to acquire someone else’s intellectual property
without any kind of entitlement.
11 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

8
Direct demonstration of replication
The direct demonstration of the replication of the work implies that the offender admits that
the replication has been carried out without any authority or permission from the person who
created the original work. As a result, prima facie evidence is established in relation to
copyright infringement thereby implying the action to be taken against the offender in
consideration of the outcomes which are pertinent to the merits of the case. It would play a
vital role in the protection of the rights of the copyright owner in a proper and appropriate
manner12. It would also help in the prevention of copyright infringement to a huge extent
thereby implying the application of the respective copyright law in a proper and appropriate
manner. In such kinds of instances the offender has to plead guilty with regard to the work
carried out in terms of replication and copying. In addition to such kinds of instances, direct
demonstration of replication may also involve the artists’ ability of determining the aspect
which involves copying or replication as far as substantial similarity is concerned. The
qualification of such kind of artist with reference to the same is the key thing in this regard as
far as the understanding of a layman is concerned with regard to the art work in question.
Indirect evidence of replication
The aspect related to the indirect evidence of replication involves the deciphering of
substantial similarity with regard to copying. It is also known by the term circumstantial
evidence which in terms of copyright infringement implies the apprehensions of a person
over the replication of content for the purpose of the arriving at a comprehensive solution.
Such kind of evidence is not enough to establish the offence of copyright infringement is it is
based simply on observances made and inferences drawn. As a result, it is difficult to
capitulate and comprehend upon the aspect of copyright infringement by the virtue of indirect
evidence as the similarities may not be substantial in nature if such kind of evidence is relied
upon. By contrast, in case of direct evidence as aforesaid, there is no need for admitting
additional evidence since the replication of the work has been deciphered on a prima facie
basis on account of the admission of guilt on part of the offender. However, indirect evidence
has an important role to play with regard to the imposition of liability in the instances where
there is no prevalence of any direct evidence.
12 Lionel Bently and Brad Sherman. Intellectual property law. (6th edn. Oxford University Press, USA, 2014).

9
Clarification
The aspect concerning similarities with regard to replication with regard to the access
concerning indirect evidence if the observance is made pertaining to the establishment of the
identical aspect of the outcomes as per the approaches undertaken by the claimant and the
offender with regard to copyright infringement in an independent manner. As a result, it is
imperative that the access to the relevant evidence has a vital role to play with regard to the
determination and identification of the similarities in order to conclude upon a comprehensive
solution thereby addressing the issues between the claimant and the offender in a proper and
appropriate manner as far as fairness is concerned.
Standards of evidence
The aspects related copying and illegal appropriation are governed by two different modes of
evidence. With regard to copying, the evidence involves testimony by an expert with
reference to the offence of copyright infringement. With regard to illegal appropriation, the
evidence involves physical or documentary aspect with regard to the violation of the rights of
the copyright without any kind of authority to do so 13. It is imperative that the two kinds of
evidential aspects are applicable to the aspects related copying and illegal appropriation.
Methods of the research
The qualitative methods have been suitable for the research since as aforesaid; copyright
involves and lays huge emphasis over quality instead of quantity. Moreover, it has been
observed that qualitative methods involve more feasibility in comparison to quantitative
methods in terms of time and finances. The secondary data has been used for the purpose of
conducting the research which involves sources and materials from the library, online
journals and electronic books, relevant cases and legislations, books and journal articles along
with the additional relevant sources wherever necessary and applicable in order to
comprehend upon the research14. The rationale behind the usage of secondary data is to save
time and finances and avoid various kinds of complexities involved in the procurement of
13 Michael WR Adams and Christopher K. Wareham. "Is Judicial Consideration of Credibility and Reliability
under Section 137 of the Uniform Evidence Law a Guarantee of Fairness or Moral Treason?" Monash UL Rev.
40 (2014): 243.
14 Thomas R Lindlof, and Bryan C. Taylor. Qualitative communication research methods. (5th edn. Sage
publications, 2017).

10
primary data. The data collected have been analyzed in an effective and efficient manner for
the purpose of its application to the research in terms of credible evidence required in order to
back up the report. Such kinds of relevant sources have played an extremely important role
with regard to the understanding of the legal framework in relation to copyright infringement.
It has also helped in the analysis of the aspect of copyright infringement in a proper and
appropriate manner.
Recommendations
As implied from the research, it is recommended that there should be strict enforcement of
the laws governing copyright infringement. The concept of copyright infringement must be
understood by the concerned people in a proper and appropriate manner so as to decipher the
aspect with respect to the violation of the entitlement of the owner of the concerned
copyright. As a result, the authenticity of the creativity and composition of the original work
would be protected and valued accordingly without any major hurdles or obstacles. The
amendments to the laws governing copyright infringement must be carried out as per the
scenario and trends involved in the industries where the aspect of copyright infringement has
a huge role to play. It is also suggested that the courts must act in such a manner that a
comprehensive solution is provided with regard to addressing of the issues of the parties to
the dispute pertaining to copyright infringement. In such aspect, the concept of equity and
fairness come into play in the interest of justice. It is further recommended that instead of
litigation in courts, the parties may try to address their issues related to copyright
infringement by the virtue of various modes of alternative dispute resolution such as
arbitration, mediation and conciliation. It would not only help in the avoidance of
complexities involved in litigation in terms of time and costs in addition to the procedures of
the court but may also lead to the scope of reduction of animosity amongst the parties.
Conclusion
As implied from the research, it can be concluded by stating that the concept related to
copyright infringement in terms of legalities has been justified and is appropriate. The
research also states the relevant cases and legislations which pertain to the violation of
copyright. The various concepts with regard to copyright infringement have also been
discussed and demonstrated accordingly in order to analyze the aspect relating to copyright

11
infringement in a proper and appropriate manner. These concepts imply the different kinds of
evidence with regard to elucidate upon the aspect of copyright infringement as far as the
demarcation between copying and illegal appropriation is concerned. The research has
provided a huge scope and opportunity for future research analysts and enthusiasts to conduct
and undertake research study in the related disciplines. However due to the restrictions and
limitations imposed by time and finances with regard to the scope, in depth analysis at a
higher level could not be carried out. Nevertheless, the research seems to provide an insight
of the concept pertaining to copyright infringement with regard to violation of intellectual
property rights of a person, most notably artists, writers and musicians.

12
Bibliography
Adams, Michael WR, and Christopher K. Wareham. "Is Judicial Consideration of Credibility
and Reliability under Section 137 of the Uniform Evidence Law a Guarantee of Fairness or
Moral Treason?" Monash UL Rev. 40 (2014): 243.
Bently, Lionel, and Brad Sherman. Intellectual property law. (6th edn. Oxford University
Press, USA, 2014).
Copyright Act 1710
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
Designer Guild Limited v Russell Williams (Textile) Limited [2001] E.C.D.R. 10
Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Limited [1981] 3 All E.R. 241
Gyles v Wilcox (1740) 26 ER 489
Joyce, Craig, Tyler T. Ochoa, Michael W. Carroll, Marshall A. Leaffer, and Peter
Jaszi. Copyright law. (4th edn. Carolina Academic Press, 2016).
Kenrick v Lawrence (1890) L.R. 25, Q.B.D. 99
LB (Plastics) Ltd. v. Swish Products Ltd [1979] F.S.R. 145 (H.L.)
Licensing of the Press Act 1662
Lindlof, Thomas R., and Bryan C. Taylor. Qualitative communication research methods. (5th
edn. Sage publications, 2017).
Lucasfilm Limited v Ainsworth [2011] UKSC 39
Templeton Island Collections Limited v New English Teas Limited [2011] EWPCC 21