« Home | Call Detail Records Can Save You In Court » | Different Games People Play » | Video Games for Kids » | Gaming Desktops - The Desktop for Super Gamers » | Who Else Wants To Tweak Windows XP For A Faster PC » | Download Wii Games Online and Transfer From PC to ... » | Gaming Consoles » | Video Games and Kids - Good Or Bad? » | All About Video Poker » | Board Games - Starting Your Own Gaming Group » 

Saturday, October 11, 2008 

Information Technology Law - Copyright in Computer Programs - Copyright Law

The Court of Appeal in the case of Nova Productions Ltd v Mazooma Games Ltd; Nova Productions Ltd v Bell Fruit Games Ltd [2007] has ruled that producing PC Video Games computer program which emulates another program, without actually copying that program's code or graphics, does not breach copyright laws. The case is likely to be of immense interest (and of potential concern) to software developers as well as the owners of copyright Most Popular Video Games computer programs.

Commentators believe that the purpose of the case is to act as a reminder that it is not, GameCube E-Cards should not, be an infringement of copyright simply to use ideas that are expressed in a copyright work. Lord Justice Jacob's conclusion that this would turn copyright into an instrument of oppression, rather than a means of encouraging creativity, is to be very much welcomed.

The claimant, Nova Productions, had created a pool-based computer game called 'Pocket Money'. Nova alleged that Mazooma Games and Bell Fruit Games - both were also games producers - had come up with very similar pool games, 'Jackpot Pool' and 'Trick Shot'. Both games contained ideas and functionality similar to those in 'Pocket Money'. Nova did not suggest that either of the defendants had directly copied the software code of 'Pocket Money'. The High Court accepted that some parts of the games may have been "inspired by" Nova, and so held there was no copyright infringement.

Nova appealed on the grounds that the animation sequences used in 'Pocket Money' amounted to "artistic works" and there would therefore be copyright in the sequence of frames. It was also alleged that the other similar features of the game were "literary works", also protected by copyright. The claim to artistic copyright was in respect of the visual appearance of 'Pocket Money', whereas the claim to literary copyright was in respect of the software code and preparatory design material for the software.

The Court of Appeal held that copyright must not be used to stifle the creation of individual works which are actually very different. But as well as its general importance in affirming the scope of copyright protection, the decision is particularly important in relation to two specific points covered in the appeal:

Whether in assessing the artistic quality of a drawing that forms part of a series of stills, such as in a cartoon, the differences between the stills can be taken into account as part of the graphical quality. The court held that a series of drawings is simply a series of graphic works, and that by putting together a series of still images an additional copyright work or protection above and beyond the still images is not created.

The Court of Appeal has affirmed the principle established in Navitaire v Easyjet, that there is no infringement of copyright in a computer code based on similarities in the visual outputs from this code. In determining whether literary copyright in a computer code has been infringed this has to be based on careful analysis of whether the code itself has been copied, rather than an analysis of whether there is any visual similarity in the outputs of that program.

Please contact us for more information on assessing damages due under termination of a contract at enquiries@rtcoopers.com

RT COOPERS, 2007. This Briefing Note does not provide a comprehensive or complete statement of the law relating to the issues discussed nor does it constitute legal advice. It is intended only to highlight general issues. Specialist legal advice should always be sought in relation to particular circumstances.

Intellectual property law, intellectual property licensing, intellectual property lawyers, intellectual property solicitors, IP law, IP lawyers, IP law PC Video Games IP solicitors, copyright law, copyright, copyright infringement, Intellectual property infringement, copyright lawyers, copyright lawyer, copyright solicitors, copyright law firm, patent law, patents, patent lawyer, patent lawyers, patent solicitors, patent law firm, law, legal, law firm, lawyers, solicitors, solicitors in wapping, Solicitors in Docklands, Solicitors in E1, patent licensing, deposit copyright work, how to protect copyright work, copyright registration, trademark law, trademark searches, reademark licensing, trademark infringement, patent infringement, confidentiality agreements, know-how, registered designs, start up business, Internet law, website agreements, passing off, technology law firm in London, legal advice in IT Law, it law, it lawyers, information technology, intellectual property lawyers, intellectual property solicitors, technology attorneys.

Visit http://www.rtcoopers.com/practice_it.php

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., speaks at a statewide training event for campaign volunteers in Columbus, Ohio, Friday, Oct. 10, 2008.  (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)AP - Barack Obama, a former community organizer, is spending untold millions of dollars to identify and mobilize voters, and Republicans acknowledge that John McCain's team probably will be outspent and outmanned. They hope it won't be outmaneuvered.

About me

  • I'm boxcvd
  • From
My profile

Archives

Powered by Blogger
and Blogger Templates