IP-2022-000001 - [2024] EWHC 2806 (IPEC)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS OF ENGLAND AND WALESINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ENTERPRISE COURT

Royal Courts of Justice,

Rolls BuildingFetter Lane, London, EC4A 1NL

Before :

CAMPBELL FORSYTH

(sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge)

Between :

WATERROWER (UK) LIMITED

Claimant

-and-

LIKING LIMITED (T/A TOPIOM)

Defendant

------------------------------------------------------

Hearing dates: 24 and 25 July 2023

Further written submissions on 27 July 2023, 24, 28, 29, 30 October 2024 and 8 November 2024

APPROVED JUDGMENT

Ms Jacqueline Reid (instructed by Moore Commercial Law Limited) for the Claimant

Mr Jonathan Moss and Ms Kendal Watkinson (instructed by Gunnercooke LLP) for the Defendant

------------------------------------------------------

This judgment will be handed down remotely by circulation to the parties or their representatives by email and release to The National Archives. A copy of the judgment in final form as handed down should be available on The National Archives website shortly thereafter but can otherwise be obtained on request by email to the Judicial Office ([email protected]).

Campbell Forsyth :

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………….3

Pleading Issue………………………………………………………………………………………………….4

Argument about Prototype status in the case………………………………………………………….5

Assessment…………………………………………………………………………………………….8

Witnesses………………………………………………………………………………………………………9

The WaterRower machines and their creation………………………………………………………………..10

Identifying the Works………………………………………………………………………………………...13

The Prototype………………………………………………………………………………………...13

Other modifications to the different WaterRower versions………………………………………….16

Does copyright subsist in the Works?………………………………………………………………………...20

The Law………………………………………………………………………………………………………20

Legislative background……………………………………………………………………………....21

Is the UK bound by EU legislation such that it no longer has discretion to apply Article 2(7) of the Berne Convention?…………………………………………………………………………………...27

UK Law……………………………………………………...……………………………………….29

EU Law………………………………………………………………………………………………42

Conformity between EU and UK Law………………………………………………………………………..44

Are any of the Works original within the meaning of the InfoSoc Directive?……………………………….48

The Prototype………………………………………………………………………………………...48

Other modifications to the different WaterRower versions………………………………………….50

Are any of the Works works of artistic craftsmanship within the meaning of s.4(1)(c) CDPA?.....................52

The Prototype………………………………………………………………………………………...52

Other modifications to the different WaterRower versions………………………………………….55

Ownership…………………………………………………………………………………………………….56

Infringement…………………………………………………………………………………………………..56

Copying………………………………………………………………………………………………56

If the series 4 Version 8 model reproduces the Prototype is there indirect copying?..........................56

Counterclaim………………………………………………………………………………………………….58

Intervening decisions…………………………………………………………………………………………58

Equisafety Limited v Woof Wear Limited [2024] EWHC [2478] (IPEC)……………………………59

Kwantum Nederland and Kwantum België v Vitra Collections AG, case number C-227/23…..……59

Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………………60

Annex 1……………………………………………………………………………………………………….61

Annex 2……………………………………………………………………………………………………….70

Introduction