Copinger & Skone on Copyright is now in its eighteenth edition, authored this time by Gwilym Harbottle; Nicholas Caddick QC; Professor Uma Suthersanen, together with a list of consulting and specialist editors.
The hardback version of this edition comes in two volumes. Volume One consists of 29 chapters on copyright, organised into 8 parts. Chapter 1 provides an introduction to copyright and the scope of copyright as covered within the book, along with an overview of the sources of law of copyright in the UK.
Part 1 consists of 9 chapters. Chapter 2 covers the nature and history of copyright in the UK and impact of EU law. It also considers the challenges and of technology and the details the impact of Brexit on UK copyright law, suggesting that perhaps following Brexit the UK will be in a better position to lead in promoting a global approach to copyright. Chapter 3 addresses the requirements for copyright subsistence including all the usual suspects: subject matter, fixation, originality plus consideration of protection of foreign works and works denied protection. Chapter 4 is all about authorship of copyright works, chapter 5 covers ownership and licenses, and chapter 6 looks at duration. Chapter 7 and 8 look at primary and secondary infringement, followed by chapter 9 setting out the permitted acts. The last chapter in this part mentions crown copyright and parliamentary rights.
Kat-accessible Image: Stephen Hanafin |
The previous edition being published in 2016 and therefore this addition provides updated information and analysis on copyright law that has been developed over the past 5 years, including concepts of originality, reproduction, communication to the public, and copyright exceptions. For those with a previous edition wondering what else the new edition might offer, significant updates include:
Chapter 2 has been re-written to present a compact and comprehensive overview of international, EU and UK copyright law, including the impact of Brexit
Chapter 3 includes recent EU case law on subsistence of copyright and its implications for the UK: Levola Hengelo, Cofemel, Brompton, Funke Medien
Chapter 4 considers the implications of the Court of Appeal’s decision in Martin v Kogan as to what constitutes authorship and joint-authorship.
In Chapter 7 the section on communication to the public now reflects guidance given by the UK High Court in Warner Music v TuneIn and in Wheat v Google. It also covers recent EU case law on infringement of copyright in sound recordings (Pelham) and cases on the distribution right.
Chapter 9 discusses recent EU case law on permitted acts (Pelham, Spiegel Online, Funke Medien) and features a full rewrite and update of temporary copying permitted act.
Chapter 13 has been updated to reflect not only the significant effects of Brexit but also the current uncertainties and difficulties with regard to the UK approach to design law generally arising from the CJEU’s rulings in Cofemel and Brompton. The chapter has also been expanded to include comprehensive coverage of registered designs.
Chapter 18 updates the position in the light of the decision of the High Court in 77m v Ordnance Survey as well as the changes in the position regarding qualification for the sui generis light after Brexit.
Chapter 22 has been expanded to include the offence of copying a registered design.
Chapter 24 covers updates on EU law including the Directive on the Digital Single Market
In Chapter 26 the industry sections have been comprehensively updated.
No comments:
All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.
It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.
Learn more here: http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/p/want-to-complain.html