This module seeks to equip students with a body of essential knowledge of national copyright law, set within a regional and international context, sufficient to enable students to understand the core concepts that operate in and influence this area.  The focus will be on the law of the UK and to a lesser extent that of the other member states of the European Union as illustrative of the essential features of copyright law.  During the course of the module, students will acquire and develop a set of intellectual tools which will enable them to critically engage with both primary and secondary materials relating to copyright.  For students who have previously studied any branch of intellectual property law, the module will considerably enhance their existing knowledge, skills and understanding  but the module does not presuppose any existing experience and is equally suited to students new to the subject.

The module consists of a structured series of exercise s designed to develop students’ knowledge and understanding of copyright law and the reflective and analytic skills necessary to critically engage with the subject.  Students will work individually and in on-line discussion groups on a range of topics central to copyright law.  The module begins with a study of the subject matter in which copyright can subsist, before then  moving on to consider the relatively complex notion of authorship in UK copyright law, the influence of European Union legislation on this, and how that then maps onto the rules regarding first ownership including rights in commissioned works.  The second part of the module invites students to consider what rights the copyright owner has to control access to their work, and the complex range of statutory and other defences that aim to balance these rights with various manifestations of the public interest in freedom of expression and in which the influence of the European Union is apparent .  The module concludes with a consideration of copyright law in international trade and the complex relationship between copyright, trade liberalisation and state control over rights to information.

(LO1) By the end of this module the student will be able to:

(LO2) Demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the international treaties, European and national legislation and case law that is UK copyright law;

(LO3) Demonstrate an ability to critically appreciate the significance of cases that develop, and legislative reforms that amend, UK copyright law;

(LO4) Understand the key concepts that form the foundation of this subject area;

(LO5) Understand the key policies and other influences that act to shape this subject area;

(LO6) Appreciate aspects of the international dimension of the subject with particular reference to trade liberalisation and state control over access to information;

(LO7) Conduct effective research, including the use of legal information retrieval systems, to locate and collate information about the law applicable in a given situation.

(LO8) Develop a critical commentary on the material located and present it to a high standard, adopting appropriate disciplinary conventions.

(S1) Critical analysis appropriate for advanced level masters study.

(S2) Problem-solving skills applicable to complex theoretical and practical contexts.

(S3) Time management and prioritisation skills by working to deadlines.

(S4) Individual and group communication skills by presentations in an online environment (e.g. the virtual classroom).

(S5) Take responsibility for independent learning agenda.

(S6) Reading, analysing and synthesising different viewpoints, becoming familiar with different viewpoints and presenting findings/conclusions in clear, comprehensible, structured format.

(S7) Critical skills with regard to the merits of particular arguments and making reasoned choices between alternative solutions or arguments in all modules and dissertation.

Week One: Copyright Subject-Matter 1: Literary, Dramatic and Musical Works

Primary material: University of London Press Ltd v. University Tutorial Press Ltd [1916] 2 Ch 601; Walter v. Lane [1900]  AC 539; Green v. Broadcasting Corpn of New Zealand [1989] 2 All ER 1056; and Norowzian v. Arks Ltd & Guinness [2000] FSR 363; Fisher v. Brooker [2006] EWHC 3239; and Sawkins v. Hyperion Records Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 565.
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include short lectures on these cases and extracts from journal articles considering and criticising these decisions.
Assignment:  HA - Students should write an essay reflecting on what it means to say that a work must be ‘original’ for copyright to subsist in it.  One approach would be to compare and contrast the decisions in Walter v. Lane and Sawkins v. Hyperion with that in Norowzian v. Arks .

Week Two: Copyright Subject-Matter 2:  Artistic Works

Pr imary material: Antiquesportfolio.com Plc v. Rodney Fitch & Co. Ltd [2001] FSR 23; Wham-O-Manufacturing Co. v. Lincoln Industries Ltd [1985] R.P.C. 127; Metix (UK) Ltd. v. GH Maughan (Plastics) Ltd [1997] F.S.R. 718; George Hensher Ltd v. Restawile Upholstery (Lancs) Ltd  (HL) [1975] RPC 31; and Lucasfilm v Andrew Ainsworth [2008] EWHC 1878 (Ch) Bonz Group (Pty) Ltd v. Cooke (New Zealand High Court) [1994] N.Z.L.R. 216; Vermaat and Powell v. Boncrest Ltd [2001] FSR 5
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include journal articles relating to the difficulties associated with defining artistic works in copyright law and the role copyright might have in the promotion and preservation of ‘culture’.
Assignment:  HA - Students should write an essay reflecting on whether the difficulties inherent in defining art are at the heart of the problem, identified by Laddie J in Metix v. Maughan , that the law has been bedevilled by attempts to w iden the field covered by copyright.

Week Three: The Concept of Authorship

Primary material: Brighton v. Jones [2004] EWHC 1157 (Ch); Cala Homes (South) Ltd v. Alfred McAlpine Homes East Ltd [1995] FSR 818; Robert Hodgens v. Robert James Beckingham [2003] EWCA Civ.143 Directive 93/98/EEC harmonising the term of protection of copyright and certain related rights (OJ 1993 L290/9) - implemented into the law of the UK under the Duration of Copyright and Rights in Performances Regulations 1995 (SI 1995 No. 3297) and the Copyright And Related Rights Regulations 1996 SI 1996 No 2967 (noting in particular the effect on the authorship of films).
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include other cases on authorship and joint authorship and short lecture notes.
Assignment:  HA - Students should write an essay considering whether, in terms of being identified as authors or co-authors, session musicians are in a stronger position than theatre director s and if so, is this defensible?

Week Four: First Ownership and Employee Works

Primary material: Performing Rights Society Ltd v Mitchell and Booker , [1924] 1KB 762); Stephenson Jordan & Harrison Ltd v. MacDonald & Evans [1952] RPC 10; Beloff v Pressdram [1973] 1 All ER 24; Ready Mixed Concrete (South East) Ltd v MPNI , (1968) 2 QB 497; Ultraframe UK v Clayton (no 2) [2003] EWCA Civ 1805
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include short lecture notes on these cases.
Assignment:  HA - Students should write an essay comparing the test put forward in Stephen Jordan & Harrison with that adopted in Ultraframe v. Clayton as to first ownership of copyright works considering which is preferable and why?

Week Five: Infringement of Copyright

Primary material: Stoddard International Plc v. William Lomas Carpets Limited [2001] FSR 848; IPC Media v. Highbury [2004] EWHC 2985; Designers Guild Ltd v. Russell Williams (HL) [2000] 1 W.L.R. 2416; Baigent v Random House Group Ltd [2006] EWHC 719
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include other cases on infringement, lecture notes and extracts from journal articles commenting on the decisions in Designers Guild and Baigent .
Assignment:  IP - Students should write an interim report aimed at explaining Lord Hoffmann’s comment in Designers Guild , that copyright law protects foxes better than hedgehogs and the implications that might have in understanding the scope of copyright protection.

Week Six: Exploitation of Copyright and the Problem of Commissioned Works

Primary material: Robin Ray v Classic FM Plc [1998] F.S.R. 622; and Griggs v. Evans [2005] EWCA 11.
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include other cases where courts have considered equitable ownership of copyright in commissioned works and lecture notes on these cases.
Assignment: IP - Begin the collection of materials for the final assignment.

Week Seven: Statutory Fair Dealing Defences and common law defences to Copyright Infringement.

Primary material: On statutory defences: Hubbard v. Vosper [1972] 1 All ER 1023; Hyde Park Residence v. David Yelland [1999] R.P.C. 655 and [2000] RPC 604; Ashdown v. Telegraph Group (CA) [2001] EWCA Civ 1142 On the Common Law: Glyn v. Weston Feature Films Co. [1916] 1 Ch 261; Hyde Park Residence v. David Yelland [1999] R.P.C. 655 and [2000] RPC 604 and Ashdown v. Telegraph Group (CA) [2001] EWCA Civ 1142 And note influence of the InfoSoc Directive 20019/EC); Berne Convention and TRIPS Article 13 (the so-called ‘three-step-test’). 
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include lecture notes, further cases on the fair dealing and common law defences and extracts from journal articles dealing with these defences in light of the InfoSoc Directive and international obligations under the Berne Convention and the TRIP s Agreement.
Assignment:  IP - Students should submit an interim report reflecting on the balance between protecting the rights of the owner of the copyright to control access to his/her work and rights necessary to protect the public interest there is in freedom of expression, taking into account the demands of the Human Rights Act.

Week Eight: International Aspects (Copyright, International Trade and State Control)

Primary material:  Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic works The WTO TRIPs Agreement (Articles 9-14) and China - IP Rights panel decision (WT/DS362/R)  
Expected Responses: DQI plus 3-5 DQF
Study packs to include lectures notes and extracts from journal articles dealing with international aspects of copyright and the background and outcome of the China – IP Rights panel decision in particular.
Assignment:  IP - Students should submit a final report reflecting on the balance between protecting the rights of the owner of the copyright to control access to his/her work and rights necessary to protect the public interest there is in freedom of expression, taking into account the demands of the Human Rights Act. 
Assessment Methods
Contribution to virtual classroom discussion; written assignments; individual project - interim report and final project.

Teaching Method 1 - Online Discussions Description: Weekly Online Discussions and Assignments in Virtual Classroom