Secondary infringement meaning

More staff and freelancers are now working from home on a regular basis. Consequently, more material is produced at home and uploaded or circulated online—for instance, teachers sharing with their pupils via video platforms. Where content is made in this setting, consider who owns the IP, any use of third‑party works, and potential breaches of third‑party rights. For more detail on matters raised by this Checklist, consult the following Practice Notes: Copyright—protectable works Copyright—authorship and ownership Copyright & associated rights—overview Copyright infringement Copyright—secondary infringement Intellectual property—remedies Copyright—permitted acts and defences Joint ownership of intellectual property rights Use the third column to note observations or remarks while progressing through the Checklist. Checklist | Further information | Notes (if any) Copyright origination ☐ Pinpoint the copyright work. Copyright is unregistered and arises automatically once a qualifying work is created...

Stage 1—preparing to bring a claim and pre-action matters Guidance on infringement, defences, ownership, injunctions, running disputes, and the Business and Property Courts Disclosure Scheme; cease and desist precedent; timetable checklist; key forms; IP insurance. Stage 2—letter of claim alleging copyright infringement Guidance on infringement, drafting letters of claim, unjustified threats and remedies, with precedents for standard and peer‑to‑peer infringement letters. Stage 3—commencing proceedings Notes on infringement, secondary infringement, permitted acts, remedies, criminal offences, the Business and Property Courts and the Disclosure Scheme; pleadings/initial disclosure precedents; Disclosure/IPEC flow tools; CPR claim/defence/settlement/default forms. Stage 4—case management Guidance on running disputes, costs management and the Disclosure Scheme; checklist; Chancery, Patents Court and IPEC Guides; Mitchell v NGN; core case‑management and disclosure forms. Stage 5—disclosure and evidence Notes on e‑disclosure, witness statements and the Disclosure Scheme; PD 57AC for Business and Property Courts trial statements (not...

In this issue: New technologies Internet Media Advertising, marketing and sponsorship LexTalk®TMT: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Latest Q&As Useful information New technologies Getty Images drops Stability AI copyright infringement claims from UK trial MLex reports that on 25 June 2025 Getty Images abandoned its direct copyright infringement claims against image generator Stability AI during the first day of closing submissions in a landmark three‑week High Court hearing in London. It is still pursuing allegations of trade mark infringement, passing off, secondary copyright infringement and issues around licensing, yet the move is a setback for the UK’s creative sector, which had sought clear precedent to provide broad copyright protection in the UK against AI models’ web scraping. See: Getty Images drops Stability AI copyright infringement claims from UK trial. IAB Tech Lab proposes framework for AI content usage compensation...

Getty Images (US) Inc and other companies v Stability Al Ltd [2023] EWHC 3090 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? General litigators will find here a clear illustration of the hurdles in obtaining summary judgment or a strike out where a claim rests only on inference. Getty pleaded primary copyright and database infringement on the footing that relevant UK acts could be inferred because Stability’s development team includes a substantial cohort of people living and working in the UK. Both parties put forward material for the hearing. Getty identified social media posts and YouTube videos consistent with the alleged conduct in the UK; Stability served seven witness statements, but these did not comprehensively set out the role of each UK-based team member or the computer systems they could use. The judge concluded there was: material arguably undermining Stability’s stance that Stable Diffusion was trained and developed outside the UK; evidence creating unresolved questions and inconsistencies on that issue; and a proper...

Following a 205-page judgment that shed little light on the contentious question, lawyers have stepped up calls for the government to issue guidance and, if needed, update long-established copyright law so rightsholders and AI developers are not left uncertain. Gill Dennis, a partner at Pinsent Masons LLP, noted that the ruling makes it more urgent than ever to decide whether training AI on copyrighted works amounts to infringement, and that the onus is now firmly on the government to deliver clear, prompt policy direction Getty Images commenced proceedings in 2023, alleging that Stability AI trained its Stable Diffusion model on millions of copyright-protected images taken from the stock image company’s own website and from its subsidiary, iStock. It further claimed that its trade mark rights were breached when Stable Diffusion generated images displaying watermarks for both Getty Images and iStock...

This new starter guide introduces copyright law and signposts further Lexis+® UK materials offering fuller coverage. It is for trainee solicitors and anyone new to copyright. Information on other intellectual property (IP) rights, including additional starter guides, appears in Practice Note: Intellectual property (IP)—new starter guide. Where topics fall outside this guide, consult the two Copyright subtopics: Copyright & associated rights transactions and management Copyright disputes For summaries of these areas, see: Copyright & associated rights—overview and Copyright disputes—overview. The guide also explains how to subscribe to the IP daily and weekly news alerts and how to contact the LexisAsk team. Introductory materials For an introduction to copyright law, see Practice Notes: Copyright—subsistence and qualification Copyright—protectable works Copyright—authorship and ownership Duration of copyright Copyright infringement Copyright—secondary infringement Copyright—permitted acts and defences Protecting copyright—training materials Protecting copyright—training materials comprise template PowerPoint slides that can serve as the basis for...

While primary infringement usually involves, in most instances, the act of reproduction, secondary infringement concerns commercially dealing in infringing copyright works. Acts of secondary infringement Secondary infringing conduct comprises: importing; possessing; selling or dealing; providing the means for making copies; permitting the use of premises for an infringing performance; and supplying apparatus for an infringing performance. Unlike primary infringers, who are strictly liable irrespective of what they knew, secondary infringers must have knowledge of the infringement. Secondary acts address those further down the 'chain'. Copyright owners may seek assistance to prevent importation and block entry of infringing copies by writing to HMRC. Where proceedings are in prospect, a claimant should write to the prospective defendant, put them on notice, and allow a reasonable period to assess and evaluate the claims advanced against them. Those in the frame for infringement will bear close scrutiny of evidence adduced of independent effort and creativity at the disclosure stage of any...

This Practice Note examines infringement of UK registered and unregistered designs, encompassing re-registered designs, continuing unregistered designs (CUDs) and supplementary unregistered designs (SUDs) introduced when the UK exited the EU. It addresses both primary and secondary infringement, sets out defences and exemptions from liability, and outlines relevant criminal provisions. The UK’s designs system is relatively intricate, particularly in the wake of Brexit, and spans several distinct rights. Because these rights can overlap, a single product may fall within multiple design protections at once. The UK designs framework and relationship with EU designs Before IP completion day (11 pm GMT on 31 December 2020), four design rights were available in the UK: UK registered designs, the UK unregistered design right (often called ‘design right’), registered Community designs (RCDs) and unregistered Community designs (UCDs). On IP completion day, the EU design regime under EU Regulation (EC) 6/2002 stopped applying in the UK, and RCDs and UCDs no longer conferred protection here. Nonetheless, owners of existing RCDs and of international design...