Understanding Intellectual Property Rights and Copyright Infringement

The document provides an insightful exploration into intellectual property rights through detailed case studies across different sectors such as pharmaceuticals, software, and design. It delves into the legal battles surrounding copyrights, patents, and trademarks, offering a deep understanding of how these cases shape the current landscape of intellectual property law. The analysis highlights notable cases like those involving Microsoft, Apple, Samsung, and others, emphasizing their outcomes and the broader implications for industry practices and legal standards.

Intellectual property
law

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
TASK 1............................................................................................................................................1
Tutorial 2: Copyright: Infringement............................................................................................1
1...................................................................................................................................................2
2...................................................................................................................................................2
3...................................................................................................................................................2
4...................................................................................................................................................2
5...................................................................................................................................................3
TASK 2............................................................................................................................................3
Tutorial 3 & 4: Copyright in the digital age................................................................................3
1...................................................................................................................................................3
2...................................................................................................................................................4
3...................................................................................................................................................4
4...................................................................................................................................................4
5...................................................................................................................................................4
TASK 3............................................................................................................................................5
Tutorial 5: Designs......................................................................................................................5
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
Intellectual property refers to man-made creation for which exclusive rights and
privileges are recognised by government. In UK three mechanisms are considered here by which
rights of IP can be registered i.e. patent, copyright or through a trademark. The rights of
intellectual property allow someone to protect their privileges from any infringement which has
been done by others (Bently and Sherman, 2014). In this report, different case laws on copyright
which is related with infringement and digital age has been explained. Along with this case law
on design is also discussed here in detail.
TASK 1
Tutorial 2: Copyright: Infringement
Copyright is an intellectual property right act which is recognised to protect the
privileges. This exists in all form of words which includes, magazines, diagrams, scripts, musical
scores, lyrics, sound recording, novels and many more. If any person is found with a guilty of
copyright infringement, then they could be liable under civil or criminal sanctions which is
depending on the nature of offence which has been committed by person (Kelbrick and Visser,
2011). If offence is committed under civil liabilities, then court may infringer person to pay
compensation amount to owner for which monetary damage has been done by them. In addition
to this, if any profit has been raised from infringing acts, then culprit had to return all earning
which has been earned by them.
According to Copyright, Design and Patent Act 1988, if any person is found with that
they are stolen the idea of owner, then are liable to compensate loss amount to them. Along with
this, Criminal liability for making or dealing with infringing articles; if they are making offence
under hire and infringement will be 6 months or penalty will be imposed. Apart from that
penalties will be imposed on the basis of offence which has been committed by person.
In given case scenario, Colin Dexter was the famous author of “Inspector Morse
Detective Novels”. This novel contain with penchant for classical music and somewhat
difficulties which are linked with drink and also a tragic with his personal relationships. On other
side, Mrs. B is the person who is also coming author of detective novels which contain somewhat
frustrated female inspector which is related with Colin Dexter novel. So, on the basis of this case
has been filled by Colin Dexter against Mrs. B for infringement the copyright of him.
1

It can be concluded from this case that Mrs. B is liable for paying compensation amount
to Colin because it does not matter whether themes are not similar as the central location which
is located in Cambridge not Oxford. As she had used same poems and quoted in her novel. So,
she is liable to pay fine which is specified in Copyright Act 1988 of UK.
Below mentions some case law has been discussed to identify that is there is infringement
of copyright along with reasonable reasons.
1.
In first case, novel of Colin Dexter has been amended for detective drama television
series. This television serious is proved as very popular which were made by the Carlton UK
production and broadcasted by ITV (Svensson and Larsson, 2012). From this scenario, it can be
analysed that if Carlton who is the production of UK and ITV had taken prior permission from
Colin, then it will not be considered as infringement otherwise both are liable for compensating
loss amount to owner of novel.
2.
With reference to given case scenario, Mystery Hotel Ltd which is a mid-range of UK
hotel Chain and offering a different kind of service to guests in their hotel rooms only. These
episodes which are offering by them are relaying with ITV players and live broadcasts. On the
basis of this, it can be find out there is no any infringement done by hotel because they are
providing episodes in their hotel only.
3.
As per given case scenario, Ms. Harple who is the owner of local Liverpool and
organising shows of Morse episodes every Tuesday in her pub. An episodes of Morse are also
broadcasted on Spanish T.V. Apart from that, Ms. Harple is having a decoder which allows her
to get signal from Spanish satellite channel to broadcasts their channel (Reese, 2014). On the
basis of this, infringement of copyright will not be assessable because she did not steal the idea
of owner to organise Morse episodes.
4.
As per given case study, Ben Johnson has obsessed with detective and novels who had
made a website where he can place the link to ITV websites so that episodes can be viewed.
Sometimes, this website is also viewable on third party website also and he did not take any
2

permission from owner of websites. So, according to this Ben has committed offence under
infringement of copyright.
5.
In given case study, Charlotte Daisy is the fan of Inspector Morse and also created the fan
club. When member become the membership, then they are having authority to access all the
episode of Inspector Morse which was retransmitted by Charlotte. In this case, if fee for
becoming the membership has been given, then person is having authority to access all the
episode other they will be infringing under copyright act.
Case law, Rogers vs. Koons. The decision of court was held that two similarities were
found between 2 images which are too close. The defence of Koon’s was rejected under the
argument that he had use more generic source while making the same statement without copying
Roger’s work.
TASK 2
Tutorial 3 & 4: Copyright in the digital age
There are different kinds of Digital Rights Management System (DRMS) which has been
developed by owners of electronics copyright work and providing information about products so
that they can achieve one or more of the below mention ends:
 To prevent unauthorised initial access according to their work or products
 To get registered and then verify details of user identification.
 To set out the terms and conditions in prevent their own rights.
 To track dissemination of material, if actual user is not there.
Apart from that it is also providing guidance how person can frequently protect their
content which has been written on the websites (Ashley, Mangi and Rodwell, 2014). Copyright
is protecting original work of authorship which are fixed in tangible medium of expression.
Below mentions different case study has been explained with respect to copyright in digital age
regarding content.
1.
In first scenario, there are many publishers who had suit against company A for
infringing the rights of copyright. As they are reproducing the presentation titles and which are
linked with the full text of other publishers. Here, company A protect itself by stating that it is
3

not possible that title is infringing other copyright and these are also not linked with the full text
and copy. As these text are made under fair use of expectations or for the temporary purpose. So,
on the basis of this, they have not infringed the rights of other publisher and not liable to pay any
compensation amount to others.
2.
In this also, some publisher also sued on few number of users who are using database for
browsing the content. Here, user defend themselves by clearly defining that they have not
downloaded any presentation from that browsing. Further, publisher argued that with the help of
websites they had made number of copies of their presentation on their system, even if they are
for temporary use and which are constituting infringement of copyright (Briones and et. al.,
2011). In this case, publisher cannot sue against them because they did not register their work
under specified authority.
3.
As per given case scenario, publisher had also suit against BT so that they can block
access to website of company A so that nobody can download any content from that. From this,
BT defend by itself by saying that they had no any influence on which content is provided. As
BT is internet service provider who is allowing to others to use their internet services and they
are not allowed to block the access of company A. However, they had also not committed any
infringement copyright. So, according to this they did not infringe any copyright of others
because there are many uses of internet service provider and they cannot block anyone website to
use their content.
4.
Now in this, Company A file the case against Mr. X for multiple infringement of multiple
copyright where content is included in data base. Furthermore, they also allege that they
committed a criminal offence by implementing the product of their company (Schmidt and
Cohen, 2013). The rights which has been made by company A is successful because Mr. X had
developed many software’s and providing services by downloading the content of 5-50% which
has been done by the request of interested party and these are subject to the payment of service
fee.
4

5.
In this, company A also suit case against Company Y for the infringement of their
software programme. But on this company Y defend by themselves stating that the software is
different from them. But actually this is not because they had developed the software programme
which is identical with this company and used in their database concept. On other side in terms
of source code they are completely different from them. So, on the basis of this company X is
liable for infringing the right of copyright and provide compensate amount to company A if any
loss had been suffered by them.
TASK 3
Tutorial 5: Designs
According to provision of Design Act 1949, these are concerned with the copyrights or
protection of undisclosed information which has been given by any members. Then purpose of
this act is to consolidate certain enactments which is related with registering the designs and
defending the rights of people in designing same kind products from others. This act also
prescribes that application for the design whether to be abandoned or refused and registration
shall not be open for public inspection. A design of work is complying with conditions which are
mentioned in article 1 of CDR. With the help of registered design, it protects the external
appearance of products only but not by their functions. Therefore, the shape of product or their
pattern may be protected by UK if it has been registered under them (Atassi and et. al., 2014).
There are many rules and regulations which has been framed by government where people can
protect their rights of products but not in terms of function. As this provision provides that a
person should registered as proprietor under register design so that they can get the power to deal
with the issues which are facing by them. Such power, can be related with anyone or equities
which is enforced in same manner and they would respect other personal property also. Here
some rights are there where owner is liable to receive compensation amount. Some of the
exclusive rights are; they can sell, hire of dispose the products in own country; hire or purchase
has been done for the purpose of trade or business. If any registered design is infringing by any
other person, then they get exclusive rights to get compensation amount them (Norman, 2015).
However, there are few points where infringement do not exit as a registered design:
 Any act has been performed for non-commercial purpose.
5

 Any activity has been done for the purpose of analysis, research, evaluation or teaching.
 Selling, importing or offering any article on that market with the prior approval of owner.
Apart from that remedies which are available for infringement such as includes injunction
whether it is related with damage or profits or anything else.
In given case scenario, Dixon ltd is producer of vacuum cleaner which has become
famous as “bagless”. On 9th May 2009 he has filled for community design right and brought in
market with the brand name of “DX01”. On other side, Zax ltd is also a producer of vacuum
cleaners and they decided to bring this in market with a name of “Mach 3”.
On the basis of this Dixon did not take any interest but he sued against Zax for
infringement on 23rd April 2009. But Dixon cannot suit against them because before getting the
right under registered design so he is not having authority.
Apart from that Zax claimed that there is not infringement because both machines are not
same in nature and there is clear difference among them. But Dixon had found number of issues
which is similar to Mach3 and more in that bin is transparent and through the bin the cyclone
shroud is visible. Furthermore, there is increase in the height of cyclone top towards the rear of
machine. So according to the Registered Design act a person can suit for infringement if they get
the right of owner otherwise not (El Haggar, 2010). Along with this if he found that anyone had
stolen his ideas after registering under specified act, then he is having authority to suit against
them and recover the compensation amount.
Case law, Samsung v Apple [2012] EWHC 1882 (Pat) lack of surface decoration is to be
held striking aspect of Apple’s CRD for the iPad. In this inclusion of surface decoration on
Samsung’s otherwise similar design is an important point of differentiation among them.
CONCLUSION
It has been concluded from above assignment there are many rights of individual which
can be protected by them while launching, innovating or creating new ideas. As different case is
discussed above and all are having their own result which are not similar to anyone. In case of
infringement of copyright is found by the other person, the owner is having right to suit against
them. Apart from that many rules and regulations has been framed by government in order to
protect the privileges regarding their work. As it become responsibility of person to get
registered of their work from specified authority so that they can avoid violation of others work.
6

REFERENCES
Books and journals
Bently, L. and Sherman, B., 2014. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press, USA.
Kelbrick, R. and Visser, C., 2011. Intellectual property law. Annual Survey of South African
Law. 2011(1). pp.719-734.
Svensson, M. and Larsson, S., 2012. Intellectual property law compliance in Europe: Illegal file
sharing and the role of social norms. New media & society. 14(7). pp.1147-1163.
Reese, R. A., 2014. Copyrightable Subject Matter in the Next Great Copyright Act. Berkeley
Tech. LJ. 29. p.1489.
Ashley, M. C., Mangi, S. C. and Rodwell, L. D., 2014. The potential of offshore windfarms to
act as marine protected areas–A systematic review of current evidence. Marine
Policy. 45. pp.301-309.
Briones, R. L. and et. al., 2011. Keeping up with the digital age: How the American Red Cross
uses social media to build relationships. Public relations review. 37(1). pp.37-43.
Schmidt, E. and Cohen, J., 2013. The new digital age: Reshaping the future of people, nations
and business. Hachette UK.
Atassi, N. and et. al., 2014. The PRO-ACT database Design, initial analyses, and predictive
features. Neurology. 83(19). pp.1719-1725.
Norman, D. A., 2015. Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions. 6(3). pp.38-43.
El Haggar, S., 2010. Sustainable industrial design and waste management: cradle-to-cradle for
sustainable development. Academic Press.
Online
Intellectual Property. 2017. [Online]. Available through:
<https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/intellectual-property-offences/intellectual-
property-offences>. [Accessed on 23rd October 2017].
7