[2025] EWHC 1954 (IPEC)

Sigil of Baphomet

It was common ground that the band used a backdrop or drape with a version of the Sigil of Baphomet on it. The band also used a version of the Sigil of Baphomet on the cover of its first single, In League with Satan, and later on the cover of the album, Welcome to Hell. Mr Lant and Mr Dunn said it was inspired by the front cover of a book called the Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey, whilst Mr Bray suggested in his oral evidence that LaVey had copied his from the same source that he (Mr Bray) had used, which he did not identify. However, both sides accept that there are quite a number of differences between the Sigil identified in the Particulars of Claim and that shown on the cover of the LaVey book. In the circumstances, neither side suggested that the version of the Sigil used by the band lacked sufficient originality to be entitled to copyright protection, but again the issue was as to authorship.

Mr Bray said that this was his design, copied and sewn on to the backdrop by a relative, and Mr Dunn and Mr Ash confirmed that they recalled a sigil backdrop being used before Mr Lant joined the band. There were some photographs of the band performing on stage in which a large version of a sigil is shown. Mr Bray had said in his witness statement that the sigil shown in the photographs was the original version, and he accepted in cross-examination that the version in the photographs differs from the version which is now in issue, which was used on the record covers.

I think Mr Lant also accepted that there had been an early version of the backdrop with a sigil on it, although he did not agree about the details of the design or who had made it. Mr Lant said that this backdrop was produced by a friend of their then vocalist, Clive Archer rather than by Mr Bray’s relative. However, he said that some time after he joined the band he produced a new version of the sigil, and this was then used on stage. Mr Lant also produced some sketches of what he said was his version, including some which appear (so far as I can judge without seeing the originals) to have been sketched in pencil. There are also drafts of the record covers featuring the sigil. In cross-examination, Mr Bray suggested for the first time that that one such sketch might have been drawn by him and attempted to explain his failure to say so earlier by saying that he had not realised this was an issue. Mr Bray had declined to inspect the disclosed drawings before making his witness statements, which may not have helped him set out his case with clarity but I was not satisfied by that explanation. In my view, this was an example of Mr Bray’s wishful thinking about the evidence, seeking to explain away Mr Lant’s possession of what appear to be preliminary sketches of one of the disputed designs. Moreover, one page has sketches of 3 images, each of which has a band member’s stage name beneath it. There were spelling mistakes in the names Abaddon and Mantas. It seems wholly improbable to me that this was a sketch first done by Mr Bray, who would have been unlikely to misspell his own stage name, and I was unconvinced by his suggestion in cross-examination that he had drawn the logo but not added the names to it. This was pure speculation. The authenticity of the documents had not been challenged prior to the trial, and I place no weight on Mr Bray’s speculation that they may have been generated recently rather than contemporaneously.

In the light of Mr Bray’s acceptance that the version of the Sigil in issue differs from his version used on the drum riser, Mr Lant’s possession of sketches of the current version, and the lack of any explanation from Mr Bray as to whether, how or when he claims to have produced the version in issue, I find on balance that Mr Lant was the author of the disputed version of the Sigil, and remains the owner of the copyright in it.