In a landmark ruling by the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court, Albright IP successfully represented Liking Ltd in a copyright dispute against WaterRower (UK) Ltd.
The judgment sets an important benchmark for copyright protection concerning non-sculptural 3D objects, specifically defining what qualifies as “a work of artistic craftsmanship” under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA).
WaterRower contended that its water-resistance rowing machines were works of artistic craftsmanship, protected by copyright, and claimed that Liking Ltd’s Topiom machines had infringed on this protection by replicating key design elements.
Liking Ltd countered this by arguing that WaterRower’s machines did not meet the criteria to be considered works of artistic craftsmanship and were thus ineligible for copyright protection.
In his ruling, Judge Campbell Forsyth concluded that WaterRower’s machines, including the prototype, do not qualify as works of artistic craftsmanship under UK law, meaning no copyright subsists in these machines.
This judgment underscores differences between UK and EU interpretations of copyright law, offering clearer guidelines for UK copyright eligibility in functional 3D objects.
Cloe Loo, Patent Director at Albright IP and legal representative for Liking Ltd, commented: “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.”
Loo noted that managing the case required handling unique challenges, including language translation and coordinating across time zones to communicate complex legal matters.
“Working closely with Liking Ltd required not only a robust IP strategy but also a deep understanding of their language and business culture. Communicating the nuances of UK copyright law in Chinese, for instance, was essential to ensure our client was fully informed and comfortable with each stage of the case,” she shared.
Robert Games, Managing Director of Albright IP, applauded Loo’s handling of the case: “We are immensely proud of Cloe. This was a challenging, multilingual case which was set to impact IP law. Cloe’s ability to build her team and manage these complexities in both English and Chinese is a testament to her commitment and expertise. This outcome is a notable achievement for Albright IP and highlights our team’s strength in high-stakes IP litigation.”
This judgment has far-reaching implications for the IP sector, particularly in terms of copyright eligibility for 3D functional objects. While an appeal may be considered, this ruling has already influenced the UK’s interpretation of artistic craftsmanship in copyright law.
Link to judgement in full: https://www.albright-ip.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/WaterRower-v-Liking-2024-EWHC-2806-IPEC-Approved-Judgment-11-November-2024.pdf
