A global consumer network on Access to Knowledge and communications issues
Home › Consumers International IP Watchlist Report 2010 › Appendix A: Country reports

United Kingdom

Sat, 11/04/2009 - 15:04 — Saskia

Legal background

Scope and duration of copyright

Is the period of protection of each type of copyright work limited to the minimum duration mandated by the Berne Convention? NO
Various formulas are used in UK legislation and generally the copyright term is either 70 or 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which a work was fixed. For literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works (including films) the copyright term is 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies. If the author is unknown, copyright will last for 70 years from end of the calendar year in which the work was fixed. For sound recordings and broadcasts the copyright term is 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was fixed, or, if the work is released within that time: 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first released. For typographical arrangement of published editions the copyright term is 25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first published. For broadcasts and cable programmes the copyright terms is 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the broadcast was made. 		1988 Act
Must a work be fixed in some material form before copyright attaches? YES
Designers Guild established that 'there can be no copyright in an idea which is merely in the head, which has not been expressed in copyrightable form, as a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work'. The 1988 Act contains an explicit requirement of fixation before any literary, dramatic or musical work may enjoy copyright protection. The main form of fixation mentioned in the 1988 Act is writing but fixation may also occur in other forms. There is however no copyright on the unrecorded spoken word. Copyright does not come into existence until a recording in either tangible or visible form is made, which may include electronic storage in digital form.		 Designers Guild, 1988 Act
Is the exercise of copyright subject to competition law, for example by compulsory licensing or regulation of royalties in the case of copyright holders who misuse their monopoly power? YES
UK and EU competition law may be applied where the intellectual property law holder of a product occupies a position of strength which may not, ultimately, be to the benefits of consumers. UK competition law is modelled on EU competition law, which also applies in the UK. Violation of Article 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty may result in compulsory licensing. With regards to Article 81 of the EC Treaty the European Commission has stated that (OJ2004/C 101/02): 'The fact that intellectual property laws grant exclusive rights of exploitation does not imply that intellectual property rights are immune from competition law intervention.' Copyright licensing agreements are subject to Article 81 if they affect trade between EU member states and if they have the 'object or effect of preventing, distorting or restricting competition', which may include absolute territorial exclusivity. Article 82 of the EC Treaty established what is known as refusal to supply, applied in cases where IPR owners refusal to supply amounts to the abuse of a dominant position. Magill established that in exceptional circumstances the refusal to license might constitute an abuse of a dominant position. The Competition Act 1988 came into force on 1 March 2000 and is closely modelled on Article 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty, however the Competition Act 1988 does not require trade between EU member states to be affected.		 EC Treaty Articles 81 and 82, Magill, Competition Act 1988
Is the exercise of copyright subject to compliance with a bill of rights or similar human rights instrument, for example by preventing copyright from being used to stifle protected speech? YES
In Ashdown the Court of Appeal held that exceptions to copyright must be read in the light of the European Convention on Human Rights, ie the Human Rights Act 1998 which enacted the European Convention in the UK. The case concerned the impact of the Article 10, the right to freedom of expression, upon the fair dealing defence to claims of infringement under the 1988 Act. The Court of Appeal concluded that if freedom of expression comes into conflict with copyright and is not covered by fair dealings or permitted acts as per the 1988 Act, the 1988 Act must be applied in a manner that accommodates the right to freedom of expression, (specifically s 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998). Protection of the right to privacy (Article 8 of the European Convention) is weighed against freedom of expression (Article 10) and English courts have held that there is no inherent preference of the right to private life or the right to free expression in their interpretations. 		Ashdown, ECHR, HRA, 1988 Act
Does the compilation of a database of non-original material fall outside the scope of copyright? NO
The elements of a database may be works in their own right, or simply items of information in textual, visual or audio form. Not all databases are protected by copyright. The 1988 Act includes a special definition of the level of originality that a database must show (s 3A(2)): 'if, and only if, by reason of the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database the database constitutes the author’s own intellectual creation.' (note the Database Directive may protect databases that are not awarded copyright protection under this originality criteria). The copyright awarded to databases by the 1988 Act does not cover the content of the database, but their selection or arrangement – that is the way in which the contents are structured. This structure must be the author’s own intellectual creation, not some standard method. Databases are defined by the 1988 Act (s 3A) as: 'collections of independent works, data or other materials arranged in a systematic or methodical way and individually accessible by electronic or other means.'		 1988 Act, Database Directive
Do exceptions and limitations in national copyright law prevail over contracts purporting to limit or override them? NO
The 1988 Act does not protect consumer exceptions, ie permitted acts and fair dealing, from contractual over-rides. However copyright law gives protection to technical protection measures (TPMs), which are used to prevent unauthorised access to and use of copyrighted digital works. TPM are capable of preventing use under the permitted acts and the circumvention of TPM is illegal so long as the protected work is made available by way of contractual terms.		 1988 Act, ss 296 and 296ZA

Freedoms to access and use

By Home UsersIs there a general exception for the fair use of copyright material for any purpose that satisfies a set of balancing criteria? NO
There is no fair use or private copying exceptions in UK copyright law. The 1988 Act only provides for a number of narrow permitted acts and fair dealing for consumers. Hence much private use by consumers is copyright infringement. Despite this copyright owners have never pursued anyone for copying within such boundaries.		 1988 Act, ss.70 and 71
Is time, space and format shifting allowed (such as ripping music from CD to an MP3 player)? LIMITED
Time-shifting of television programmes and radio broadcasts does not constitute infringement of copyright as long as it is carried out in domestic premises for 'private and domestic use'. However, format-shifting is not permitted under the 1988 Act, although among consumers there is a widespread belief that such action is legal under UK law. 		1988 Act, ss.70 and 71
Can consumers reproduce copyright material for their own use in the original format, for example for backup purposes? NO
The 1988 Act does not provide for a fair use or private copying exception, only some limited fair dealing and permitted acts exceptions. The 1988 Act provides for a limited exception for the purpose of making a backup copy of computer programs if 'necessary' to have for the purposes of 'lawful use'. This exception was introduced with the implementation of the Software Directive and is immunised from contractual over-rides. However, it is not clear when a back-up copy is 'necessary'. According to the European Commission back-up copies are to be made 'for security reasons' and has emphasised that only one copy is permitted for this purpose. Whether the back-up copy is 'necessary' will depend on a variety of considerations, including the stability of the medium on which the original copy is stored. UK case law has established that it will rarely be necessary to make a back-up copy of a program sold on CD-ROM.		 Software Directive Article 5(2), 1988 Act s.50A, Sony Computing, Sony
Can works be communicated to a limited public (for example, family and friends) without infringing copyright? NO
The communication to the public of a work is restricted by copyright in literary, dramatic, musical and artistic works, sound recordings, films and broadcasts. This right was introduced in implementation of the InfoSoc Directive. Because UK law does not provide for a fair use or private copying exception communicating copyrighted to a limited public, such as family and friends, is technically an infringement of copyright.		 1988 Act, InfoSoc Directive
Does a collective licensing scheme permit the copying or sharing of copyright material by consumers in exchange for a media or equipment levy? NO
There are no levies in the UK. UK law does not provide for a private copying exception and so there is no basis for a levy providing compensation.
For EducationIs reproduction permitted for the purposes of research or study? LIMITED
The 1988 Act provides for an fair dealing exception covering private and non-commercial research. However, sound recordings and films are excluded from being copied for the purpose of private research. This exception was first developed in the 18th and 19th century, but with the implementation of the 2003 InfoSoc Directive in UK law in 2003 the exception was narrowed to 'non-commercial' purposes, previously it applied to commercial research as well. There is a large degree of ambiguity with regards to the distinction between commercial and non-commercial research for institutional users, for example in the context of a professor undertaking research as part of their teaching activities and where the research may have non-commercial as well as commercial purposes. This ambiguity does not generally affect consumer or end user research. The 1988 Act also provides for a number of narrow permitted acts in favour of educational establishments (schools, further education colleges and universities). 		1988 Act, s.29, see also ss.32-26A for education and ss.37-44A for libraries and archives
Does any such research and study provision cover distance and online education? NO
The 1988 Act does not provide for distant and online education. Reprography (ie photocopying, printouts of electronically stored material and electronic copies) for non-commercial instructional purposes by educational establishments is subject to severe limitations. Reprographic copies of more than 1 per cent of any work in any quarter of a year are prohibited, and only permissible if licences for such copying are not available.		 1988 Act, s.36
May translations of works be made for educational purposes? NO
1988 Act
May works be reproduced and published by educational institutions in connection with systematic instructional activities? NO
1988 Act
OnlineIs hyperlinking to a Web site allowed without permission of the site's owner? LIMITED
Generally a search engine identifying sites and linking to homepages does not lead to copyright infringement. However deep linking, where one site contains a link to another at a particular page within its content may be regarded as copyright infringement.
Are temporary or transient copies, incidental to a lawful use, excepted from copyright? NO
Temporary or transient copies are permitted if the act is 'an integral and essential part of a technological process the sole purpose of which is to enable a transmission of the work in a network between third parties by an intermediary.' However, no case law on this issue has confirmed this interpretation. Also, s 17 of the 1988 Act stipulates that no transient or incidental copies may be made of software.		 1988 Act s.28A, InfoSoc Directive Article 5(1)
Are ISPs protected from liability for infringements by third parties, because the law either does not impose liability upon intermediaries or limits their liability in certain circumstances? YES
An ISP is not liable so long as it does not have actual knowledge of the illegal activity or information. The 1988 Act exempts 'mere conduits' providers from infringing copyright and host service providers from liability to pay monetary compensation for infringements of copyright and other wrongful acts before being notified and required to take the material down.		 E-Commerce Directive, InfoSoc Directive Article 5, 1988 Act s.31A
Do ISPs provide Internet access without conducting filtering or monitoring for potential copyright-infringing material? YES
There is no general obligation on service providers to monitor the information that they transmit or store, or to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity. Also known as the "mere conduit" provision, ISPs are not liable for information transmitted on their networks provided they do not initiate the transmission, do not select the receivers of the transmission, and do not select or modify the information in the transmission. The E-Commerce Directive says that ISPs must not monitor content and that ISPs must state the nature of any restrictions in the users’ contract. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 provides that it is a cirminal offense to intentionally and withour lawful authority to intercept a public postal service or a public telecommunication syustem. In late 2009 the ISP Virgin Media announced that it would trial Detica's new CView system in order to measure copyright infringement on an ISP's network via use of Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) technology. Virgin Media has agreed to trial the product as part of its planned music service, to be launched in summer 2010. The announcement was made shortly after Ofcom, UK telecoms regulator, confirmed that it had held talks with Detica, a BAE subsidiary, about the possible use of its DPI system by UK ISPs.		 E-Commerce Directive Article 12, ITRE Amendment 121, IMCO Amendments 11, 12, 13,14, 62, 75, 81
Are the names and personal information of customers who are alleged to have engaged in copyright-infringing behaviour protected from disclosure by their ISPs? YES
Generally copyright holders can only obtain the personal information relating to an IP (internet protocol) address from ISPs through a Norwich Pharmacal court order. The Data Protection Act regulates the collection and use of personal data. An IP address in isolation is not personal data under the Data Protection Act, according to the Information Commissioner. For an ISP an IP address becomes personal data when combined with other information that is held, such as a subscriber’s name and address. In the hands of a website operator, an IP address can become personal data through user profiling, even if that individual's name is unknown.		 Data Protection Act 1998
By content creatorsCan copyright works be non-commercially remixed or mashed up into new works? NO
There is no fair use or private copying exceptions in UK copyright law. Neither is there an exception for non-commercial use.
May computer software be reverse engineered for the purpose of creating interoperable software? YES
The 1988 Act provides allows for a computer program to be decompiled if the following conditions are met: it is necessary to decompile the program to achieve interoperability, which is the 'the permitted objective' of decompilation in UK copyright law. Also, the information so obtained can’t be used for any purpose other than the permitted objective. The conditions are not met if: the person in question has readily available to them the information necessary to achieve the permitted objective; if the person does not confine the decompiling to such acts as are necessary to achieve the permitted objective; if the information obtained is supplied to any person to whom it is not necessary to supply it in order to achieve the permitted objective; or if the information is used to create a computer program which is substantially similar to the program decompiled. The 1988 Act provides that the right to decompile for the purpose of achieving interoperability is protected from contractual over-rides, ie it can’t be restricted by the copyright owner through provisions in the terms and conditions. 		1988 Act s.50, Software Directive
Is the incidental inclusion of a work in other material permitted? YES
Copyright is not infringed by incidental inclusion in an artistic work, sound recording, film, broadcast and cable programme.		 1988 Act s.31
Is there are copyright exception for parody or satire? NO
No, the 1988 Act does not provide for such an exception. The Gowers Review of Intellectual Property, commissioned by the Government and published in 2006, recommended for the creation of such an exception by 2008. But thus far this recommendation has not been implemented.		 1988 Act
Do creators who license their work retain the moral right of attribution? YES
The 1988 Act gives authors have the right of 'paternity' and 'integrity'. These rights exist as long as the copyright on a work. The right to prevent false attribution exists until 20 years after the author’s or director’s death – creating the curious possibility of false attribution being lawful 20 years and one day after the death of the author or the director.		 1988 Act ss.77, 80, 85 and 86
By the pressIs there a copyright exception for the news of the day? NO
In UK law there is no exception for the 'news of the day' as defined by the Brussels version of the Berne Convention (Article 9(3)).
May copyright material be reproduced for the purposes of review and criticism? YES
The copying or use of any kind of work, including sound recordings, films, broadcasts and cable programmes for the purpose of ‘criticism and review’ is permitted. Fair dealing also allows for the performance of a work if accompanied by a ‘sufficient acknowledgment’, and provided that the work has been made available to the public.		 1988 Act s.30(1)
May political speeches, speeches in judicial proceedings and/or other public speeches be used for any purpose? NO
With regards to parliamentary and judicial proceedings copyright is not infringed when reported on, 'but this shall not be construed as authorising the copying of a work which is itself a published report of the proceedings.' The Crown (monarch) is entitled to copyright in every work made by the monarch or an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of his or her duties. The Crown has waived its copyright for ministerial speeches, which means that although copyright is asserted, Government wishes to encourage the widespread use of the material under the condition that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context, as well as being correctly acknowledged and the source and status of the material is identified.		 1988 Act ss.45, 163
May quotations be used for any purpose? NO
The criticism and review provision of the 1988 Act does permit quotes. However it is not clear what the boundaries of 'criticism' are and how much of the original work can be used for such a purpose. Case law indicates that lengthy extracts from the original works can be used where the purpose was purely to enable criticism to be made.		 1988 Act s.30(1)
By LibrariesMay libraries copy works that cannot reasonably be obtained commercially? NO
1988 Act
May libraries copy works for users for the purpose of research or study? LIMITED
Broadly speaking 'prescribed' libraries and archives may supply readers with a single copy of published library, dramatic or musical material for the purpose of private study or research, provided that the reader makes a signed declaration to that effect and pays a sum not less than the cost attributable to producing the copy.		 1988 Act ss.37–44, CCM, SI 1989/1212
Are libraries allowed to make preservation or archive copies of materials in their collections? YES
Archivists and librarians may make or supply a copy in whole or in part of a literary, dramatic or musical work from a document in the library or archive if certain conditions detailed in the act are satisfied.		 1988 Act s.43
In making permitted copies, are libraries entitled to circumvent technological protection mechanisms (TPMs)? YES
Librarians or archivists may make copies for the purpose of preserving or replacing a works by placing the copy in their permanent collection, or in order to replace the works in the permanent collection of another library or archive a work that has been lost, destroyed or damaged. This permission is restricted to cases where it is not reasonable practicable to purchase a copy of the work.		 1988 Act s.42
By disabled usersIs it permissible to copy or adapt work for the use of those with disabilities? YES
The InfoSoc Directive permits 'uses for the benefit of a people with a disability, which are directly related to the disability and of a non-commercial nature, to the extent required by the specific disability'. The 1988 Act provides for designated bodies to make copies of broadcasts and issue them to the public with sub-titles for the deaf and hard hearing, or otherwise modified for the special needs of those physically or mentally handicapped in other ways. The 1988 Act was supplemented by the Copyright (Visually Impaired Persons) Act 2002 which allowed the making of accessible copies for the personal use of such a person, provided that he or she has lawful possession or use of a 'master copy' of the work which is accessible as a result of impairment.		 InfoSoc Directive, 1988 Act s.74, VIP
In public affairsAre laws excluded from copyright? NO
The Crown (monarch) is entitled to copyright in every work made by the monarch or an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of his or her duties. The monarch is entitled to copyright in every Act of Parliament, Act of the Scottish Parliament, Act of the Welsh and Northern Ireland Assemblies. However, the Crown has waived its copyright for UK primary and secondary legislation, which means that although copyright is asserted, Government wishes to encourage the widespread use of the material under the condition that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context, as well as being correctly acknowledged and the source and status of the material is identified.		 1988 Act s.163
Are other governmental works excluded from copyright? NO
The Crown (monarch) is entitled to copyright in every work made by the monarch or an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of his or her duties. The Crown has waived its copyright for the following works: public records; government forms (blank forms); the national curriculum material of England; Government press notices and press notices issued by the Scottish parliament; national curriculum material for Wales; acts of the Scottish Parliament, explanatory notes to acts of the Scottish Parliament and Scottish statutory instruments; government consultation documents; Scottish national curriculum documents; information on official websites unless otherwise stated; ministerial speeches and articles; and headline statistics. This means that although copyright is asserted, Government wishes to encourage the widespread use of the material under the condition that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context, as well as being correctly acknowledged and the source and status of the material is identified.		 1988 Act s.163
Is there a copyright exception for use of material in judicial proceedings? NO
The Crown (monarch) is entitled to copyright in every work made by the monarch or an officer or servant of the Crown in the course of his or her duties. The Crown has not waived its copyright for material in judicial proceedings. This means that although copyright is asserted, Government wishes to encourage the widespread use of the material under the condition that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context, as well as being correctly acknowledged and the source and status of the material is identified.		 1988 Act s.163
Are the results of publicly funded research required to be published under an open access license? NO
This is not a requirement, though the 'Unlocking Innovation' initiative launched in 2009 has made some public sector information and data available under a Crown Copyright license that allows for commercial use of the data. This initiative originated with the Power of Information Taskforce and the data is available at www.data.gov.uk

Freedoms to share and transfer

May copyright works be freely offered for commercial rental? NO
Generally the owner’s copyright does not preclude subsequent dealing with copies, but since the 1988 Act and the subsequent amendments as a result of the Rental Right Directive certain forms of subsequent dealing are no longer permitted. S 18A(1) of the 1988 Act specifies that rental or lending of copies to the public is an act restricted by the copyright in the work. Rental is defined as “making a copy of a work available for use, on terms it will or may be returned, for direct or indirect economic or commercial advantage”. The test case for 'lending' is whether the lending establishment is accessible to the public. Hence lending a DVD or book to a friend is not copyright infringement.		 1988 Act s.18A(1), RRD
Does the law permit a work to be released to the public domain before the copyright term expires, without any formality other than an overt act of relinquishment? NO
An “overt act of relinquishment” is not recognised in UK law. In law there is no instance which would allow an orphaned work to be released into the public domain.
Are orphaned works treated differently in the law to other copyright works, for example by allowing them to be compulsorily licenced, limiting remedies, or by releasing them into the public domain? NO
Is parallel importation permitted? LIMITED
Parallel imports are subject to EU law, specifically trade mark law. There is no right to control imports between EU Member States of goods already placed on the market in the European Union (EU). However, trade mark law does provide for a right to prevent importation into the EU if these goods have been marketed elsewhere, the so-called Community exhaustion of rights. The European Court of Justice found that Member States cannot introduce or maintain systems such as that of 'international exhaustion' where the first sale anywhere in the world would allow their later import into the EU. 		Trade Marks Directive 1988, Silhouette
Are there incentives for the use, production and dissemination of free and open source software within copyright law or elsewhere in national law/policy? LIMITED
In early 2009 the Government published a open source and open standards action plan in which it pledged to 'ensure that the Government adopts open standards and uses these to communicate with the citizens and businesses that have adopted open source solutions'. As part of the plan Government departments will be required to adopt open source software when 'there is no significant overall cost difference between open and non-open source products'.
Are there incentives for the use, production and dissemination of open access material (e.g. textbooks) within copyright law or elsewhere in national law / policy? NO
Are there specifications or incentives in national law/policy for the use of open document formats? NO

Administration and enforcement

What is the maximum penalty for copyright infringement for an individual? UK law does not clearly distinguish between infringement by a person or corporate entity. Though the maximum penalty for a person infringing copyright in the course of business is £50,000. 1988 Act ss. 107 and 198 as amended by the Digital Economy Act 2010
What is the maximum penalty for copyright infringement for a corporation? UK law does not clearly distinguish between infringement by a person or corporate entity. Though the maximum penalty for a person infringing copyright in the course of business is £50,000 1988 Act ss. 107 and 198 as amended by the Digital Economy Act 2010
Do the penalties for copyright infringement distinguish between personal versus (large-scale) commercial use, other than at the discretion of a judge? NO
No, although copyright law to some extend recognises commercial copyright infringement from non-commercial infringement. Copyright infringement is dealt with as 'primary restricted acts' and 'secondary infringement'. The law identifies some commercial infringement of copyright as secondary infringement but primary restricted acts do not distinguish between commercial and non-commercial infringement, ie can be either. Secondary infringement is the 'dealing in infringing copies of a work, eg selling, importing or exporting or exporting copies made without the licence of the copyright owner.' Secondary infringement requires that the infringer should know or have reason to believe that he was dealing in infringing copies. They are also typically carried out in 'the course of business'. Claims of secondary infringement are typically made with regards to copyright infringement on a commercial scale.		 1988 Act ss. 16-21 (primary infringement) and 22-26 (secondary infringement)
Is the creation or distribution of devices that can circumvent technological protection measures (TPM) permitted, where such devices can be used for purposes that would not infringe copyright? NO
Making, dealing in, or possessing for commercial purposes a circumvention device while knowing or having reason to believe that it will be used to make infringing copies makes the person in question liable as an infringer of copyright in his own right. If a person deals in any device specifically designed or adapted to circumvent TPMs, or publishes information intended to enable or assist persons to circumvent TPMs, copyright owners may bring a secondary infringement claim.		 1988 Act ss.296-296ZE
Is the use of such devices by consumers permitted for any purpose that would not infringe copyright? YES
Yes, possession and use of such devices by consumers is in itself not unlawful.		 1988 Act ss.296-296ZE
Does national copyright or consumer protection law require disclosure to consumers of the existence of TPMs and any potential limitations on the use of TPM-protected material? NO
No, despite the 2006 Gowers Review of Intellectual Property recommending that the 'DTI should investigate the possibility of providing consumer guidance on DRM (TPM) systems through a labelling convention without imposing unnecessary regulatory burdens.' (Recommendation 16)
Are the operations of copyright collectives subject to public oversight? NO
Are ISPs independent of copyright owners, to the extent that no law or industry code of conduct requires them to notify their users who are alleged to have committed a copyright infringement online? NO
In 2008 a number of rights owners and six UK ISPs, namely BT, Virgin, Orange, Tiscali, BSkyB and Carphone Warehouse, agreed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) which saw the ISPs send notification letters to subscribers whose IP address had been identified by the right owners as being used to infringed copyright through peer-to-peer filesharing. The Digital Economy Act 2010 will amend the Communications Act 2003 to the effect that ISPs need to co-operate with rights owners in an Ofcom supervised process and notify their subscribers that copyright owners have identified their IP address as being used to infringe copyright.		 Digital Economy Act 2010, Communications Act 2003
Are criminal sanctions limited to cases of large-scale commercial counterfeiting? NO
No, according to the 1988 Act criminal sanctions may also be applied against a person who, otherwise than in the course of a business, infringes copyright 'to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the making available right'. Showing or playing in public a recording of a performance without 'sufficient consent' may also be subject to criminal sanctions. In March 2010 the Teeside Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided to drop the prosecution of 17-year-old Matthew Wyatt for infringing copyright through the peer-to-peer filesharing network Oink. The home of Matthew Wyatt's parents was raided in 10 September 2007 by Trading Standards employees and members of both the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) and the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), who seized more than 160 items. Though Wyatt was not the original uploader, he was subsequently charged with distributing copyrighted music so as to prejudicially affect the copyright holder, a criminal offence that carries a maximum 10-year custodial sentence.		 1988 Act s.198
Are damages for copyright infringement based on the loss sustained, rather than by a pre-established or statutory damages award? LIMITED
UK can award damages which are in relation to the copyright infringement. For example, when using a computer programme without license the damage is pegged to the licence fee for the unlicensed copy. UK courts generally do not award punitive damages in intellectual property lawsuits. Although the 1988 Act permits a judge to award 'additional damages' in a civil case concerning an infringement of copyright or other rights covered by the 1988 Act. The phrase is unusual in English law, with other legislation more commonly referring to exemplary, restitutionary or aggravated damages.		 1988 Act s. 97
Is there provision to penalise the wrongful allegation of copyright infringement? NO
However UK common law punishes 'perverting the course of justice'. Aggravating and mitigating factors include: the nature and number of offences, whether premeditated or spontaneous, degree of persistence, arrest of innocent person, any impact upon prosecution. Specific examples include: Threatening or interfering with witnesses, concealing evidence and false allegation of crime resulting in arrest of innocent person.

Conclusions

UK copyrighti law is substantially different from that of other countries. It is generally very restrictive. Copyright is treated as property right (copyright violation is treated as 'tortuous invasions of property') and hence copyright owners have the right to decide whether and how the copyrighted work is used. There is no 'fair usei' or 'private copying' exception in UK law, only some limited fair dealingi and permitted acts exceptions. Hence much private and/or non-commercial use by consumers is copyright infringement.

The UK is a member of the EU as well as a common law country, hence copyright law draws on a variety of sources including case law. Relevant EU directives have been incorporated into UK law in a variety of ways. Where the statutory (written) law is not clear, case law is the authoritative source of law. UK copyright statutes are drafted as general principle – as a 'conduit pipe' that is relatively uncomplicated in language, but more or less indeterminate in scope, hence its interpretation, application and enforcement may be subject to change and there are a number of issues, especially digitally related, where it is not clear how existing statutory law will be interpreted by the courts. The major statutes relating to copyright have been subject to substantial revision in the last two decades.

UK copyright law does not distinguish between private or corporate copyright infringement. However private infringement is generally treated as a civil offense, where commercial infringement may be treated as civil or criminal offense. It is not clear how large scale non-commercial infringement is treated. Non-profit or private use are generally not a mitigating factor in UK law.

Creative Commons license icon
This work is licensed under a Public Domain Creative Commons license