Football Fixture Lists Protected by Database Copyright

The High Court has given an interesting ruling on the intellectual property rights subsisting in the English and Scottish football league fixture lists, finding that such lists, while not capable of protection by database right, do enjoy protection as copyright works.

To view the article in full, please see below:

Full Article

The High Court has given an interesting ruling on the intellectual property rights subsisting in the English and Scottish football league fixture lists, finding that such lists, while not capable of protection by database right, do enjoy protection as copyright works.

Background

The defendants were football pools and betting companies and also Yahoo!, all of which used the fixture lists without a licence. This judgment was the trial of a preliminary issue and did not consider possible defences, which may be the subject of a further hearing. It is understood that Yahoo, at least, is running defences relating to fair dealing and public interest.

Under Directive 96/9/EC, a database is defined as "a collection of independent works, data or other materials arranged in a systematic way and individually accessible by electronic or other means." The Directive provides two forms of intellectual property protection for databases: (i) copyright (incorporated into section 3 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the "CDPA") and (ii) the "sui generis" database right.

For a database to qualify for database it must "by reason of the selection or arrangement of the contents of the database" constitute the author's own intellectual creation. To date there has been little or no case law on the meaning of this requirement. Database right applies only if there has been a substantial investment in obtaining, verifying or presenting the contents of the database, the ECJ having made clear in previous cases that these activities must be distinguished from the creation of the data itself, an activity which does not attract protection.

The claimants argued that (i) database right subsisted in the fixture lists; (ii) copyright subsisted in the fixture lists as databases; and/or (iii) copyright subsisted in the fixture lists as tables or compilations or other literary works (not databases) under Section 3 of the CDPA.

Decision

A large part of the judgment is devoted to explaining in great detail the process by which the fixtures lists are compiled, which is highly complex and involves the application of multiple rules and practical...