Fisher v Brooker
An organist who wrote the famous organ melody in A Whiter Shade of Pale was a joint author of the song, and his delay of 38 years in claiming did not bar his claim.
Facts
Matthew Fisher was the organist in the band Procol Harum when it recorded A Whiter Shade of Pale in 1967. He composed the organ solo that is a distinctive feature of the song. The band's lead singer, Gary Brooker, was credited as the sole composer of the music. In 2005, Mr Fisher claimed that he was a joint author and owner of the copyright in the music. The Court of Appeal held that he was a joint author, but that his claim was barred by his delay.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that Mr Fisher was entitled to a declaration that he was a joint author and owner of the copyright in the music. Lord Neuberger said that the trial judge had been entitled to find that Mr Fisher's contribution to the music, the organ solo, was significant and original, so he was a joint author. His delay of 38 years in bringing the claim did not bar it, because the defendants had not suffered any prejudice as a result of the delay, and, in fact, had benefited from the exploitation of the song. Delay alone is not enough to bar a proprietary right.
Related cases on copyright: subsistence, originality and authorship
- Cofemel Sociedade de Vestuário SA v G-Star Raw CV Case C-683/17, EU:C:2019:721
- Creation Records Ltd v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1997] EMLR 444
- Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Ltd [1982] Ch 119
- Football Dataco Ltd v Yahoo! UK Ltd Case C-604/10, EU:C:2012:115
- George Hensher Ltd v Restawile Upholstery (Lancs) Ltd [1976] AC 64
- Hadley v Kemp [1999] EMLR 589
- Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening Case C-5/08, [2009] ECR I-6569
- Interlego AG v Tyco Industries Inc [1989] AC 217
Studying intellectual property law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
