Case Nos: IL-2023-000080 and IL-2024-000038 - [2025] EWHC 2561 (Ch)
Fecha: 10-Oct-2025
Transitional provisions
Transitional provisions
The Directive provides that databases shall continue to be protected by copyright as well as the sui generis database right introduced by the Directive. The Directive has provisions on copyright law. The Database Regulations amended the 1988 Act accordingly.
In the case of some Member States, such as the UK, the criteria for originality in the Directive are more exacting than those which had applied under national law. The change had the potential to affect copyright protection for existing databases, so this was ameliorated by transitional provisions. Reg.29 of the Database Regulations provides:
‘29. (1) Where a database—
was created on or before 27th March 1996, and
is a copyright work immediately before 1st January 1998,
copyright shall continue to subsist in the database for the remainder of its copyright term.
In this Regulation “copyright term” means the period of the duration of copyright under section 12 of the 1988 Act (duration of copyright in literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works).’
- Heading
- Judge Hacon
- Interim appeals
- Representation
- The defendants’ skeleton arguments
- Applications during the trial
- The witnesses
- Database Right – the law
- Application of EU law
- Definition of database
- Subsistence
- Ownership
- Infringement
- Substantiality
- Extraction
- Re-utilisation
- Consultation
- Consent
- Regulation 19 of The Database Regulations
- EU law and estoppel, laches and acquiescence
- Copyright – the law
- Applicability of EU law
- Subsistence of copyright in a database
- Transitional provisions
- The consequence of amendments to a database
- Ownership of copyright
- Infringement of copyright
- Issuing copies to the public
- Communication to the public
- Making an adaptation
- Authorisation
- Use of the PAF by RMG
- The defendants’ case in summary
- RMG’s claim in summary
- Database Right
- The creation and maintenance of the GetAddress Database
- Consultation
- Whether the defendants had a licence granted by RMG
- The relevance of RMG’s End User Terms
- Whether RMG otherwise consented to use of the PAF
- Regulation 19 of the Database Regulations
- The Consumer Rights Act 2015
- Restraint of trade
- Copyright
- Subsistence and ownership
- Infringement
- Limitation
- Joint liability
- Additional damages
- IDDQD’s claim
- Database right
- The contracting party in the agreement with IDDQD
- Whether either RMG’s or IDDQD’s licence extended to Codeberry
- Whether the acts of the defendants were licensed under IDDQD’s terms
- Regulation 19 of The Database Regulations
- The Consumer Rights Act 2015
- Infringement of database right
- Joint liability
- Breach of contract
- Cause of action in respect of the RMG EUT
- Breach of the RMG EUT
- Clarity of the RMG EUT
- Restraint of trade
- Conclusions