Mills & Reeve had a victory in the Court of Appeal last Wednesday where it was acting for a software developer in a copyright infringement dispute. The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision in the case of (1) Laurence Wrenn (2) Integrated Multi-Media Solutions Ltd v Stephen Landamore [2007] EWHC 1833 (Ch) where the judge decided that an agreement under which copyright in computer software vested in the company jointly owned by the parties and Mr Landamore succeeded in his counterclaim for unpaid royalties.
As the High Court judge decided that the company owned the software, it did not have to rule on the issue of whether it was owned by Mr Wrenn or Mr Landamore. However, the case is of interest as the judge did go on to deal with the question of what terms the court will imply into business agreements relating to ownership of intellectual property, where there was no written agreement dealing with this issue. The judge adopted the "minimalist approach" set out in the case of Ray v Classic FM (ie, the court will imply the minimum terms necessary to make an agreement between parties workable). In the present case, the judge concluded that an exclusive licence in favour of Mr Wrenn was all that would have been required to make the agreement work. It would not have been necessary to imply a term that the copyright should have been assigned to Mr Wrenn (ie, giving him full ownership of the software).
The case is a reminder of the importance of having a written agreement dealing expressly with issues as to ownership of intellectual property. It also highlighted that, in the absence of a written agreement, the court will apply the minimum term necessary to make an agreement workable.
Rebekah Richards acted for Mr Landamore in successfully opposing the appeal brought by Mr Wrenn who claimed that the High Court had erred in its findings. The Court of Appeal refused Mr Wrenn's appeal.