Electronic Techniques (Anglia) Ltd v Critchley Components Ltd, 1997 FSR 401
Citation:Electronic Techniques (Anglia) Ltd v Critchley Components Ltd, 1997 FSR 401
Link to case on WorldLII (reference).
Rule of thumb:If a person has made a contribution to content, but the contribution is minor, do they still get a share of the copyright profits? No, if is deemed to be a minor contribution then they do not get a share of the copyright.
Judgment:
The Court held that it is not often clear when someone has made a clearly definable contribution to a piece of work and when this should be declared to be too abstract a contribution to gain copyright protection, ‘although... different copyrights can protect simultaneously a particular product and an author can produce more than one copyright during the course of a single episode or creative effort, for example a competent musician may write the words and the music for a song at the same time, it is quite another thing to say that a single piece of work by an author gives rise to two or more copyrights in respect of the same creative effort. In some cases the borderline between one category of copyright work and another may be difficult to define, but that does not justify giving the author protection in both categories. The categories of copyright are to some extent arbitrarily defined. In the case of a borderline work, I think there are compelling arguments that the author must be confined to one or other of the possible categories. The proper category is that which most nearly suits the characteristics of the work in issue’, Laddie J, at 413
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.