Walter v Lane
 |
This article relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources. Discussion about the problems with the sole source used may be found on the talk page. (February 2012) |
Walter v. Lane [1900] AC 539, was a judgement of the House of Lords on the question of Authorship under the Literary Copyright Act 1842. It has come to be recognised as a seminal case on the notion of originality in copyright law.
Contents |
[edit] Facts
Reporters from The Times Newspaper took down shorthand notes of a series of speeches given by the Earl of Roseberry and later transcribed them, adding punctuation, corrections and revisions to reproduce verbatim the speeches. These were then published in The Times. The Respondent in the case published a book including these speeches, taken substantially from the reports of those speeches in The Times. The question for the court was whether the reporters of the speech could be considered "authors" under the terms of the Literary Copyright Act. The House of Lords, reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal considered that the reporters were authors. The effort, Skill and time that spent was sufficient to make them original.
[edit] Reasoning
The court by a 4-1 majority reversed the decision of the court of appeal. For Lord Bramton it was crucial that "The preparation [of the reports] involved considerable intellectual skill and brain labour beyond the mere mechanical operation of writing"[1]
[edit] Significance
Although the Literary Copyright Act 1842 did not contain a notion of "originality", the decision in Walter v Lane would later be treated as authority for the notion of "originality" within English Copyright law.
[edit] References
- ^ Aplin, Tanya; Davis, Jennifer. Intellectual Property Law: Text and Materials. Oxford University Press. pp. 73.
