Copyright Infringement

Front 1

What are the 3 requirements for primary infringement?

Back 1

1) the defendant carried out one of the activities which falls within the copyright owner's control;
2) the defendant's work was derived from the copyright work (causal conenction); and
3) the restricted act was carried otu in relation to the work or a substantial part thereof (section 16(3))

Front 2

Which case states that where a person copies a 3D object, they may infringe the copyright in the drawings on which it was based even thoguh they had never seen the drawings?

Back 2

British Leyland v Armstrong [1986]

Front 3

Which case states that the court is likely to accept a causal conenction if the similarities are very numerious, or so individual that the possibility of their having been independently conceived by the defendant is implausible?

Back 3

Designers Guild v Russell Williams [2000]

Front 4

Which case states that a defendant may attempt to show that the similarities are attribtuable to the fact that the two works were inspired by the same source?

Back 4

Harman Picture v Osbounre [1967]

Front 5

Which case shows that a defendant may attempt to show that the similarities were due to chance?

Back 5

Francis Day Hunter v Bron [1963]

Front 6

What were the facts of Designers Guild v Williams [2000]?

Back 6

The judge infeered that the fabric design 'marguerite' had been derived from the complainant's design 'Ixia' as there were 7 similarities between the designs that went 'far beyond the similarities that would be expected.'
Also, the designer of marguerite had the opportunity to copy Ixia as she was at a trade fair in 1995 where the design was exhibited.

Front 7

Which case sets out the basic test for 'the work or a substantial part thereof?'

Back 7

Designers Guild v Williams [2004]

Front 8

What is the test for 'substantial part?'

Back 8

It must be determined by its quality or quantity. It depends on its importance to the copyright work, and NOT on its importance to the defendant's work.

Front 9

What were the facts of Hyperion Records v Warner Music (1991)?

Back 9

Hyperion Records claimed that the use of 8 notes from their song infringed their copyright.
It was held that the 8 notes could not be treated as a separate work and thus subject to copyright protection, however they stressed that it did not meant that 8 notes could not be a copyright sound recording in other situations.

Front 10

Which case states that the plot may be protected by copyright?

Back 10

Harman Pictures v Osbourne [1967]

Front 11

Which case states that the sotryline, incidents and themes may be protected by copyright?

Back 11

Corelli v Gray (1913)

Front 12

Which case stated that 'the feeling and artistic character' of the claimant's work could be protectable and could be infringed?

Back 12

Krisarts SA v Briarfine [1977]

Front 13

Which case concerned the drawing of a hand pointing to a square of a ballot paper, and stated that 'as the level of skill and labour that was used in creating the work was minimal, nothing short of exact literal reproduction would suffice?

Back 13

Kenrick v Lawrence (1890)

Front 14

What is the idea-expression dichotomy?

Back 14

the idea that copyright predominantly protects the mode of expression used by the author, but not the actual idea itself.

Front 15

Which case shows that literary copyright does not give rights that enable persons 'to monopolize historical research or knowledge?'

Back 15

Baigent v Random house (Da Vinci Code Case) [2006]

Front 16

Whcih case states that it does not matter whether the part taken is a substantial part of the defendant's work?

Back 16

Warwick Films v Eisinger [1969]

Front 17

Which case states that the question of substantiality is one of QUALITY rather than QUANTITY?

Back 17

The Newspaper Licensing Agency v Marks & Spencer plc [2003]

Front 18

Which section of the act states that copying in relation to a film/ tv broadcast includes making a photograph of the whole or any substantial part of any image?

Back 18

Section 17(4) CDPA

Front 19

Which case stated that the fact that a feature was 'functionally important' did not make it 'more potent' for demonstrating that a substantial part had been reproduced?

Back 19

Johnstone Safety v Peter Cook [1990]

Front 20

Whchi case stated that there was no copyright in the title of a film itself as it was 'too unsubstantial?'

Back 20

Francis Day & Hunter v 20th Century Fox [1940]

Front 21

Whcih case states that with regards to repeated takings, a persno will infringe if the acts can reasonably be seen as a single act and the cumulative taking is 'substantial'?

Back 21

Electronic Techniques Anglia v Critchley Components [1997]

Front 22

Which case stated that 'repeated systematic copying from the same work' could be infringement?

Back 22

Newspaper Licensing Agency v Marks & Spencer [2001]

Front 23

What is the standard-protocol rule regarding copying?

Back 23

10% or one chapter of a book may be copied.

Front 24

What is secondary infringement?

Back 24

The aiding or abetting of the primary infringer. Concerns people in a commercial context who either deal with infringin copies, facilitate such copying, or facilitate public performance.

Front 25

Which parts of the act set out the circumstances for Secondary Infringement?

Back 25

Sections 22-27 CDPA 1988

Front 26

What is the mental element required for secondary infringement?

Back 26

The defendant must know or have reason to believe that the activities in question are wrongful- DECIDED OBJECTIVELY.

Front 27

Which case states that the defendant must be in a position where they are able to evaluate the information given to them, and have a reasonably amount of time to consider it?

Back 27

LA Gear v Hi-Tech Sports [1992]

Front 28

Whcih case states that a defendant could have 'known' about the wrongful nature of their activities without ever having seen the copyright work?

Back 28

Pensher Security Doors v Sunderland CC [2000]

Front 29

Which case states that n determining infringement 'more freedom to copy' would be allowed in the case of a historical work than a work of fiction?

Back 29

Ravenscroft Case

Front 30

In which case did the judge state that copyright did not protect the 'facts and information' in the claimant's book, but the combination of 'facts, themes and ideas?'

Back 30

Baigent v Random House (Da Vinci Code)