Copyright disputes

This subtopic outlines and provides guidance on the steps to take where there may be a claim for copyright infringement.

UK copyright law is mainly set out in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988).

Copyright infringement

CDPA 1988 gives the copyright owner exclusive rights in the UK to carry out various acts in relation to the copyright work. Activities set out in CDPA 1988, carried out by those other than the copyright owner, without permission, will infringe the owner’s exclusive rights unless certain exceptions or defences apply. For an introduction to the law of copyright, see Practice Note: IP—new starter copyright guide and Precedent: Protecting copyright—training materials.

Before issuing proceedings, a claimant should establish that copyright subsists in the relevant work, that they own it and that the copyright has been infringed. Infringement can be primary or secondary. Broadly, there will be primary infringement if a substantial part of the work is reproduced as a result of copying. There will be secondary infringement where an infringing copy is knowingly imported, possessed, sold or distributed. Copyright infringement is of particular importance in creative

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest IP News

IP weekly highlights—25 September 2025

This week's edition of IP weekly highlights includes: Welcome to this week’s edition of the IP weekly highlights: a hand-picked summary of news analysis, updates and new content from the world of IP. These highlights focus on the key rights of copyright and associated rights, database rights, trade marks and passing off, designs, and patents as well as covering issues relating to confidential information, know-how R&D and IP disputes.

The construction of jurisdiction clauses in the context of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 and the mechanisms of service(Campeau v Gottex Real Asset Fund 1 (OE) Waste S.À.R.L)

Dispute Resolution analysis: This case considers a jurisdictional clause in the context of service under CPR 6.33(2B)(b), which allows service out of the jurisdiction where the defendant is party to a jurisdiction clause. There is no corresponding requirement for the claimant to be a party to that jurisdiction clause. The starting point is that jurisdiction clauses are not generally intended to concern disputes with third parties. However, that is no more than a starting point and one which can be departed from in appropriate cases. This was one such appropriate case whereby the circumstances and construction of the clause led to the finding that it did include the third party claimant’s (Mr Campeau) claim. While not strictly necessary given the judge’s findings in relation to the construction of the clause, Mr Justice Butcher considered that, where a jurisdictional clause was wide enough to encompass disputes from third parties, then it will likely also amount to a ‘relevant term’ for the purposes of section 1(4) of the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (C(RTP)A 1999). That meant that the third party, in seeking to enforce their rights under the SPA, was statutorily obliged to do so in England and so could rely upon CPR 6.33 (2B) (b) in that respect also. Written by Georgia Whiting, legal counsel (contentious construction) at Capita.

IPO announces new intellectual property minister appointment

The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) has confirmed the appointment of Kanishka Narayan MP as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, with responsibility for intellectual property. IPO Chief Executive Adam Williams welcomed the appointment, noting the minister's role in supporting the UK's intellectual property system and its contribution to economic growth through protection and commercialisation of innovations.

What changes to UK design law might be on the horizon?

IP analysis: The UK government is consulting on reforms to modernise design law, aimed at simplifying the system, improving enforcement, and adapting to digital innovation. Key proposals include introducing powers to prevent bad-faith filings, extending periods of deferment, and allowing the registration of designs in video format. The consultation also explores the simplification of unregistered design rights, the alignment (or otherwise) of protection in the UK and EU post-Brexit and addresses AI-generated designs. The consultation closes on 27 November 2025. Written by Emily Gamblen, trainee Patent attorney, and Caroline Marshall, partner, Potter Clarkson LLP.