University of London Press v University Tutorial Press ([1916] 2 Ch. 601)
Case Summary:
University of London Press Ltd. v. University Tutorial Press Ltd.
[1916] 2 Ch. 601 (Chancery Division, England)
Background / Facts:
University of London Press published examination papers and materials.
University Tutorial Press (the defendant) printed and published similar question papers for the purpose of aiding students in their exam preparation.
University of London Press claimed that the question papers published by University Tutorial Press infringed their copyright.
The case raised the question of whether exam questions and educational materials could be protected under copyright law.
Legal Issues:
Are examination questions eligible for copyright protection?
Is there copyright infringement if similar questions are reproduced or adapted?
What constitutes “originality” and “work” under copyright law?
Judgment:
The court held that:
The exam questions published by the University of London Press were original literary works protected by copyright.
The reproduction or publication of similar or identical questions by University Tutorial Press amounted to copyright infringement.
The court recognized that intellectual effort and skill are involved in framing exam questions, which qualifies as a work of authorship.
Therefore, examination papers are subject to copyright protection just like other literary works.
Key Legal Principles:
1. Originality and Copyright:
Copyright protection extends to literary works, including exam questions if they involve intellectual effort.
The test for originality is whether the work is the author’s own intellectual creation, not copied from another.
2. Scope of Literary Work:
The definition of literary work is broad and includes not only books and articles but also materials like examination papers.
This case expanded the scope of copyright to educational and academic materials.
3. Infringement:
Copying or publishing substantially similar content without permission amounts to infringement.
Even partial reproduction can infringe if the copied part is substantial.
Related Case Laws for Context:
Walter v. Lane (1900) AC 539
Established that skill, labor, and judgment in creating content confer copyright protection.
University of London Press Ltd. v. Cooper (1922) 1 Ch 119
Follow-up case dealing with copyright in educational materials and enforcement.
Kohler v. Esselte Ltd. (1987) Ch 156
Applied similar principles in recognizing the originality of practical literary works.
Eastern Book Company v. D.B. Modak (2008) 2 SCC 1 (India)
Indian Supreme Court affirmed copyright protection for headnotes and editorial content, resonating with principles from this case.
Significance:
University of London Press v. University Tutorial Press is a foundational case in copyright law concerning educational and examination content.
It expanded the scope of copyright beyond traditional books and writings to intellectual creations in academic contexts.
The case set a precedent that works involving intellectual skill and labor, even if short or functional like exam questions, are protected.
It highlights the importance of protecting educational publishers’ rights against unauthorized reproduction, ensuring economic incentives for creating such works.
Summary in Simple Terms:
University of London Press made exam questions.
Another publisher copied these questions to help students.
The court said exam questions are protected by copyright because they involve skill and effort.
Copying them without permission is illegal.
This means schools and publishers have rights over their exam papers, just like books or articles.
RELATED Blog
0 comments