Database transactions and management

Protection for databases

A database can be protected in different ways:

•
copyright can protect literary and artistic works including tables and compilations that form part of a database (literary copyright for tables and compilations was removed for databases by section 3(1)(a) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988)), if they are original works
•
copyright can protect the structure of a database under CDPA 1988, ss 3–3A which gave effect to Article 3 of the EU Database Directive, if it is an original literary work. The test of originality is that there must be effort spent on the selection and arrangement of the data and sufficient judgment and skill exercised in the process to make the work the author's own intellectual creation
•
the unique (sui generis) database right pursuant to the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 (CRD 1997), SI 1997/3032 which gave effect to Article 7 of the EU Database Directive can protect the data in the database if the database is the result of substantial investment in obtaining, verifying or presenting its contents

See

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

Supreme Court clarifies trade mark post-sale confusion (Iconix v Dream Pairs)

IP analysis: The Supreme Court has held that post-sale confusion can amount to an actionable infringement and is not confined to being assessed in a subsequent transactional context. It also rejected the argument that extraneous post-sale circumstances cannot be taken into account when assessing similarity between a trade mark and sign. While rejecting these arguments on errors of law, the Supreme Court nevertheless upheld the appeal, finding the Court of Appeal had been wrong in assessing the trial judge’s conclusion as irrational, and were not justified in substituting their own different views on similarity and likelihood of confusion. The decision cements the status of post-sale confusion as an actionable infringement, and delivers a reminder of the remit of appellate courts and the circumstances in which multifactorial assessments of the trial judge should be reevaluated. Written by Nick Smee, partner at Browne Jacobson LLP.

IP weekly highlights—3 July 2025

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 all mainly from a UK and European perspective.

Court of Justice to rule on AI and copyright in a landmark case against Google

EU law analysis: Boriana Guimberteau, partner, and Pauline Desjours, associate, of Stephenson Harwood AARPI, consider the request preliminary ruling involving Goole before the Court of Justice on the articulation of copyright rules and generative AI technologies.

Commission opens consultation on geographical indications delegated regulation

The European Commission has launched a consultation on a draft delegated regulation that will supplement Regulation (EU) 2023/2411 on geographical indications (GIs) for craft and industrial products. The draft regulation specifies requirements for GI application documentation, submission procedures to the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), direct registration criteria, and appeal processes. The consultation period runs from 30 June 2025 to 28 July 2025.