PA Media/time limit for copyright infringement claims

[sandman]

If the alleged infringement took place on publication - in my case 2015 - why are they trying to charge me a fee quoted on their current 2023 rate card? This would be like a builder doing some work on your house in 2015 but not invoicing you until 2025 and charging you his 2025 hourly rate.

[snapperman67]

You have to understand that the analogy you used is if you had entered into a contract with the rights holder - this is not the case. You have been accused of using a copyrighted image, the claimant is free to ask the court for their normal licensing fees (not the lowest you can find on Istock) and also dissuasive damages (plus additional uplifts for non-attribution etc). Various IPEC judgements by Judge Birse (senior IPEC judge) are very clear on this and are usually relied upon in the quantum part of the hearing. This is backed up by the Copyright Designs & Patent Act 1988 and various pieces of EU (which the UK is still signed up to) and the Berne Copyright Convention. My feelings given the several recent rulings, as long there is clear evidence of the copyright holders licensing charges that the court would easily rule in their favour and defendant runs the real risk of significant dissuasive damages. Last week, a colleague was awarded 200% uplift plus interest and costs (approx £5300) on 3 qty images. I am awaiting a copy of the judgement. The defendant ran up a legal bill of nearly £15k with a very similar defence which they now have to pay themselves plus the court order.

[HammerofPompey]

Hi Query,

While it is nice that they take into account someone's ability to pay, that redfflects you away from the fact that if this went to court, the only damages they would be eligible for is the loss of the licence fee. Civil justice only seeks to put a claimant into the position he would have been in if a licence had been obtained in the first place. Incidental expenses such as the cost of a web crawling agency would not be admissible in the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court small claims court. And if it went to court the company would probably be represented by a lawyer whose fees would also not be admissible, so in effect this would cost them several times the amount of damages they might win.

Interesting - can you give evidence/quote the law/guidance where this is specified? My particular interest id Copy Track where they work on no win ne fee for the Artist - yet do not validate that the Artist is actually the IP owner and are being engaged by a French Company for Concept Productions, whose manager also signs as the Product Manager for Fotofilia that was bought up by Adobe 7 years ago!!

[AndyJ]

As I explained in my answer to you in your Copy Track thread, I can't quote any statute law because the principle of civil restitution is based on both common law and equity. I pointed to you a source, namely the section headed Remedies on page11 of this pdf entitled an Introduction to Civil Proceedings in England and Wales. I also explained how you could find similar statements on other websites dealing with the law of England and Wales. You may find this Wikipedia article helpful in covering the background, although you should be aware that it ranges over wide areas of the law which don't apply in a simple case of a remedy for copyright infringment. And although I said not to look at the American law, this definition of Actual Damages, produced by the Cornell Law School, succinctly summarises the principle.

However since your are dealing with a claim which ultimately originates in France, quoting the English law may fall on deaf ears, as the legal system in the rest of Europe operates differently. On the other hand, the French courts have no jurisdiction over you if you are in the UK, so if the claimant was to follow through on any threat of taking you to court, they would have to do so in the UK, and therefore English law would apply.

If you need more reassurance on the subject you should speak to a solicitor, preferably one who deals with intellectual property law.