The Copyright is Strong in This One...

[major_clanger]

I'd vaguely been planning on sitting in on some High Court cases regarding intellectual property over the next few months, but when I saw a reference to a particular copyright case due to start today I just knew I had to drop everything and head on over to the Royal Courts of Justice. After all, how often do you get the chance to see an Imperial Stormtrooper in court?

I'm not kidding. Lucasfilm v Ainsworth is being heard in Court 52, one of the modern courtrooms in the Thomas More tower at the RCJ (bugshaw and purplecthulhu would recognise it; it's identical to the courtroom where B's case against her stepmother was heard). The frontmost desk, right in front of Mr Justice Mann, held a range of hemlets and props, in the shape of Stormtrooper and TIE Pilot helmets, a Tusken Raider head and a dismantled set of Stormtrooper armour, whilst a pair of mannequins on the left hand side of the courtroom next to the racked shelves of law reports displayed a full Stormtrooper armour set and another TIE helmet. Almost as soon as we had started, the Judge asked lead counsel for Lucasfilm if the assorted characters would be there throughout the trial. Michael Bloch QC suggested that they would, noting that they were unlikely to rustle papers or make mobile phone calls so should not pose much risk of disturbing proceedings...

This report on the case sums up the issues well. At heart it is like many other copyright cases: the central question is whether the creative work under dispute was produced by someone under employment or as an independent contractor. On the basis of the opening arguments today though there will be some other issues brought into play, such as the extent to which Mr Ainsworth originated elements of the costume designs or simply implemented designs produced by conceptual artists such as Ralph McQuarrie. (McQuarrie, a noted SF designer, won't be appearing in person, but has given a written witness statement.) It also seems that there will be an argument over the extent to which the Stormtrooper armour is a creative artwork - in effect, a sculpture - or more of a prototype product design, like a shoe or handbag. This is important because the protection given to product designs is much shorter than that which subsists in copyright. In a nutshell, it looks like Mr Ainsworth will be arguing that the Stormtrooper armour is protected by design right, not copyright, and if so then the design protection has expired, or alternatively if it is protected by copyright, then said copyright rests at least in part with him. Lucasfilm will be arguing that copyright is the appropriate form of protection, and that Mr Ainsworth either didn't create the helmet design or that if he did so it was for them and that they thus own the copyright.

The case is apparently scheduled to last ten days. This may sound a lot but it is clear that there will be a lot of evidence for Mr Justice Mann to pore over regarding the creative process behind the films - a matter not made easier by the key events having taken place more than thirty years ago. I won't have time to follow the whole case in court but I'll see if I can pop in again in a few days' time, hopefully when there is some more substantive legal discussion of the IP issues at hand.

Comments

[the-magician.livejournal.com]

Ooh, sounds interesting! I look forward to your further reports and the outcome of the case.

[ffutures.livejournal.com]

Why do I suspect that the farce is strong in this one...

[aardvark179.livejournal.com]

I find your lack of merchandising rights disturbing.

[alexmc.livejournal.com]

> produced by someone under employment or as an independent contractor

This is a big issue for me and my colleagues. We are independent contractors - but our contracts are specifically written to allocate all copyrights over to the end client.

This places us at a disadvantage when trying to create products which are not just for the current client but are in fact longer term projects.

[inamac.livejournal.com]

That is interesting, because I've always suspected that the area where fandom is most likely to fall foul of copyright protection is in the areas of costume design and model making. But if product design is an issue than that opens a whole new can of sandworms...

Will follow with interest.

[hatusu.livejournal.com]

Very interesting. Please keep us updated.

I wonder what date they are starting from regarding his design? Would it be when he turned it in, the release of the first movie, or the release of the most recent movie? It seems that they would have had to pay him again for it to last that long, if in fact it is not considered work product owned by Lusasfilm.

It seems to me that whatever is decided in the court, it will affect a lot of people and create precedent.

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

Based on what I saw in court today, Lucasfilm's chronology seems to be roughly as follows:

1975: Ralph McQuarrie produces concept art for Stormtroopers.

1976: Andrew Ainsworth makes helmets based on McQuarrie's artwork.

2000s: Ainsworth starts selling helmets using the old moulds.

Ainsworth seems to be claiming that he put a lot of extra creative input into the helmet design to take it from artwork to final prop. McQuarrie's concept art, as shown in court, can be seen here; if it's not disputed that this predates Ainsworth's involvement, then I think Ainsworth may have a hard time making his claim.

If Lucasfilm are right then the copyright is still in force (and will be until 70 years after McQuarrie dies). But if the Court can be persuaded that this is in effect an industrial design, i.e. of something meant to be a functional product, then the design right from the mid-1970s will have long since expired.

The date of the design is definitely in the mid-1970s either way. The case is being brought now because Ainsworth only started selling replica props a few years ago.

[hatusu.livejournal.com]

First of all, I love Legal Clanger with the wig.

I remembered McQuarrie's art as being very like the finished product, so it was nice to confirm it. Thanks for all the information.

Will you be attending every day? I'll check back for updates.

[major-clanger.livejournal.com]

Alas, I have other commitments - notably three nice fat essays to write over the next month! But I'll see if I can get in to see a bit more of the case over the next couple of weeks.

[hatusu.livejournal.com]

Thanks. I'm very interested.

[cairmen.livejournal.com]

Looking forward to hearing more about this.

[timill]

Oh what fun. The sting seems to be in the tail of the Reuters report: there was no written contract.

This one could run and run...

[palatinate.livejournal.com]

Something mentioned in Metro today is that Ainsworth has already been successfully sued for $10m on this by Lucasfilm in the US. Although US and UK law is different and I don't know the details, it shows the Lucasfilm arguments have held sway at least once already. I don't know if Ainsworth is appealing the US ruling but I would assume that $10m would be enough to put him out of business.

[hatusu.livejournal.com]

I saw that, too. I instantly felt sorry for the guy. How much money could he have made?

[beermat]

coo, very interesting!