Information Technology Law - Copyright in Computer Programs - Copyright Law

The Court of Appeal in the case of Nova Productionsin the sequence of frames. It was also alleged that the
Ltd v Mazooma Games Ltd; Nova Productions Ltd vother similar features of the game were "literary
Bell Fruit Games Ltd [2007] has ruled that producing aworks", also protected by copyright. The claim to
computer program which emulates another program,artistic copyright was in respect of the visual
without actually copying that program's code orappearance of 'Pocket Money', whereas the claim to
graphics, does not breach copyright laws. The case isliterary copyright was in respect of the software code
likely to be of immense interest (and of potentialand preparatory design material for the software.
concern) to software developers as well as theThe Court of Appeal held that copyright must not be
owners of copyright in computer programs.used to stifle the creation of individual works which are
Commentators believe that the purpose of the case isactually very different. But as well as its general
to act as a reminder that it is not, and should not, be animportance in affirming the scope of copyright
infringement of copyright simply to use ideas that areprotection, the decision is particularly important in
expressed in a copyright work. Lord Justice Jacob'srelation to two specific points covered in the appeal:
conclusion that this would turn copyright into an§ Whether in assessing the artistic quality of a
instrument of oppression, rather than a means ofdrawing that forms part of a series of stills, such as in
encouraging creativity, is to be very much welcomed.a cartoon, the differences between the stills can be
The claimant, Nova Productions, had created ataken into account as part of the graphical quality. The
pool-based computer game called 'Pocket Money'.court held that a series of drawings is simply a series
Nova alleged that Mazooma Games and Bell Fruitof graphic works, and that by putting together a series
Games - both were also games producers - hadof still images an additional copyright work or
come up with very similar pool games, 'Jackpot Pool'protection above and beyond the still images is not
and 'Trick Shot'. Both games contained ideas andcreated.
functionality similar to those in 'Pocket Money'. Nova did§ The Court of Appeal has affirmed the principle
not suggest that either of the defendants had directlyestablished in Navitaire v Easyjet, that there is no
copied the software code of 'Pocket Money'. The Highinfringement of copyright in a computer code based on
Court accepted that some parts of the games maysimilarities in the visual outputs from this code. In
have been "inspired by" Nova, and so held there wasdetermining whether literary copyright in a computer
no copyright infringement.code has been infringed this has to be based on
Nova appealed on the grounds that the animationcareful analysis of whether the code itself has been
sequences used in 'Pocket Money' amounted tocopied, rather than an analysis of whether there is any
"artistic works" and there would therefore be copyrightvisual similarity in the outputs of that program.