Sawkins v Hyperion Records Ltd
A musicologist who produced performing editions of old music, adding figured bass and other elements, created original musical works protected by copyright.
Facts
Dr Sawkins, a musicologist, produced new performing editions of four works by Michel-Richard de Lalande, a French baroque composer, whose works were out of copyright. He added figured bass, corrected errors, and made other additions, which required a lot of skill and labour. Hyperion Records recorded the works using his editions, but argued that copyright did not subsist in them, because they merely reproduced Lalande's music.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that copyright subsisted in Dr Sawkins's editions as original musical works. Mummery LJ said that the musical work did not need to be original in the sense of being novel or different from the previous work, but that it should originate from the author, involving the expenditure of more than negligible or trivial effort or relevant skill in the creation of the work. Music is not limited to the notes, but includes performing indications and other elements that affect the sound of the music. Dr Sawkins's additions affected how the music sounded when it was performed.
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
- Fisher v Brooker [2009] UKHL 41, [2009] 1 WLR 1764
- 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
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.
