1923 (12) TMI 2 - HC - Companies Law

Appeal Court Recognizes Copyright in Book's Notes & Glossary, Finds Infringement

The High Court's decision was overturned on appeal, recognizing the appellants' copyright in the notes and glossary of their book but not in the text ... - Issues Involved:1. Copyright entitlement of the appellants' book.2. Infringement of copyright by the respondents.3. Legal definition and recognition of an abridgment.4. Application of the Copyright Act of 1911.5. Originality and the extent of labor, skill, and judgment required for copyright protection.6. Specific judgment on the notes and glossary of the appellants' book.Detailed Analysis:1. Copyright Entitlement of the Appellants' Book:The appellants claimed copyright for their book 'Plutarch's Life of Alexander. Sir Thomas North's Translation. Edited for Schools by H.W.M. Parr, M.A.' They argued that the respondents' book, which included the same 20,000 words from North's translation along with an additional 7,000 words, infringed their copyright. The appellants' book also included marginal notes, an introduction, analysis, a chronological table, transition notes, and a glossary, which were omitted from the respondents' book.2. Infringement of Copyright by the Respondents:The respondents published their book following a similar general plan, including detached passages from North's translation joined to form a continuous narrative. The Court of Appeal found that the respondents intended to publish a book that would be preferred by students over the appellants' book, and their Lordships concurred with this view.3. Legal Definition and Recognition of an Abridgment:The judgment clarified that the appellants' and respondents' books could not be considered true abridgments. An abridgment requires a complete and accurate statement of the original work's thoughts, opinions, and ideas in a more concise form, requiring independent labor and a different language from the original. The appellants' and respondents' books, being mere selections of detached passages, did not meet this criterion.4. Application of the Copyright Act of 1911:Section 31 of the Copyright Act of 1911 states that copyright is a statutory right. The judgment emphasized that copyright protection requires the labor, skill, and capital expended to impart a new quality or character to the product, differentiating it from the raw material. The appellants' book did not demonstrate sufficient labor, skill, and judgment in its text to merit copyright protection.5. Originality and the Extent of Labor, Skill, and Judgment Required for Copyright Protection:The judgment cited several cases to illustrate the principle that copyright protection requires the application of labor, skill, and judgment to create a new and original work. The appellants' book did not show sufficient evidence of these elements in its text. However, the notes and glossary were deemed to require classical knowledge, literary skill, and judgment, making them eligible for copyright protection.6. Specific Judgment on the Notes and Glossary of the Appellants' Book:The notes and glossary in the appellants' book were found to be well-chosen, accurate, and valuable for educational purposes. The respondents had serially copied many of these notes, constituting an infringement of the appellants' copyright in these sections. The judgment concluded that the appellants were entitled to copyright in the notes and glossary but not in the text of the book.Conclusion:The High Court's appellate jurisdiction decree was set aside, and the decree of Mr. Justice Fawcett was amended to recognize the appellants' copyright in the notes and glossary. The respondents were directed to pay the costs of the hearing before the first Court, while the parties were to bear their own costs of the appeal.