In a significant High Court decision in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, Albright IP has successfully defended its client, Liking Ltd, against copyright infringement claims brought by WaterRower (UK) Ltd.
Albright says the judgement sets a precedent for copyright protection of non-sculptural 3D objects, specifically addressing the criteria for “a work of artistic craftsmanship” under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA).
WaterRower claimed that its water-resistance rowing machines were works of artistic craftsmanship and were protected by copyright, and that Albright’s Hong Kong-based client’s Topiom rowing machines infringed on this protection by allegedly reproducing a substantial part of the machines.
Liking Ltd argued that the WaterRower machines did not qualify as works of artistic craftsmanship and thus were ineligible for copyright protection.
In delivering his judgment, Judge Campbell Forsyth ruled that WaterRower machines, including its prototype, do not meet the requirements under UK law as works of artistic craftsmanship, and therefore, no copyright subsist in the machines.
Albright IP, patent director, Cloe Loo, who served as IP attorney for Liking Ltd, said: “This judgment provides much-needed clarity in UK copyright law on what qualifies as a work of artistic craftsmanship.
“For a number of years, conflicting UK and EU case law has created uncertainty around copyright protection for 3D objects that aren’t sculptures. This ruling establishes that such objects must meet the test of artistic craftsmanship to qualify for copyright. It’s an important milestone for the IP sector.”
