header-logo header-logo

13 April 2007 / Lindy Golding , Penelope Thornton
Issue: 7268 / Categories: Features , Media , Intellectual property
printer mail-detail

Whose format is it anyway?

Are television rights protectable in the UK? Lindy Golding and Penelope Thornton report

Copyright does not protect general ideas but the expression of ideas (see Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2001] FSR 11, [2001] 1 All ER 700). However, in IPC Media Ltd v Highbury-SPL Publishing Ltd [2004] EWHC 2985 (Ch), [2004] All ER (D) 342 (Dec) Mr Justice Laddie recognised the difficulty in  defining the boundary between the taking of general ideas and concepts and copying in the copyright sense.

Copyright protection for television programmes hit the news in November 2005 with the high-profile case brought by Simon Fuller's 19 TV against FremantleMedia Ltd, Simco Ltd, Syco Ltd and Simon Cowell. It involved a dispute about the music talent shows Pop Idol and The X Factor. However, the case settled without any further judicial guidance.

Spotlight on privacy

The rise in the popularity of reality television programmes has turned the spotlight on format piracy. In April 2000 the Format Recognition and Protection Association (FRAPA) was

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll