Database transactions and management

Protection for databases

A database can be protected in different ways:

•
copyright can protect literary and artistic works including tables and compilations that form part of a database (literary copyright for tables and compilations was removed for databases by section 3(1)(a) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988)), if they are original works
•
copyright can protect the structure of a database under CDPA 1988, ss 3–3A which gave effect to Article 3 of the EU Database Directive, if it is an original literary work. The test of originality is that there must be effort spent on the selection and arrangement of the data and sufficient judgment and skill exercised in the process to make the work the author's own intellectual creation
•
the unique (sui generis) database right pursuant to the Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997 (CRD 1997), SI 1997/3032 which gave effect to Article 7 of the EU Database Directive can protect the data in the database if the database is the result of substantial investment in obtaining, verifying or presenting its contents

See

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest IP News

UPC reiterates right to rule on infringement of UK patents

Law360, London: The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has doubled down on asserting its jurisdiction over claims involving UK patents, citing a recent ruling that courts in the EU can assess the validity and infringement of patents from outside the EU.

IP weekly highlights—20 March 2025

This week’s edition of IP weekly highlights includes: a hand-picked summary of news analysis, updates and new content from the world of IP. These highlights focus on the key rights of copyright and associated rights, database rights, trade marks and passing off, designs, and patents, as well as covering issues relating to confidential information, know-how R&D and IP disputes all mainly from a UK and European perspective.

CLA introduces new licence permissions for generative AI content use

The Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA) has announced on 18 March 2025 that it will add new permissions to its commercial and public sector licences from 1 May 2025, allowing UK professionals to legally use copyright-protected content in generative AI (GAI) tools. The expansion follows CLA research showing 61% of professionals already use GAI at work, with 80% using it weekly. The new permissions aim to enable lawful content use while ensuring fair compensation for rightsholders. The changes were developed in consultation with publishers, authors and visual artists.

European Court of Justice gives decision on asymmetric jurisdiction clauses (Società Italiana Lastre Spa v Agora SARL)

EU Law analysis: The Court of Justice recognised, under Article 25 of Regulation 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast), the validity of asymmetric jurisdiction clauses in favour of competent courts of EU Member States or members of the Lugano Convention. If such clauses respect the mandatory elements of Brussels I (recast), they are to be assessed under the regulation rather than under individual national laws. The clause must identify objective factors allowing a court seised to determine whether it has jurisdiction. A reference to ‘any other competent court’ is sufficient (subject to the proviso that competent courts are l imited as above). This case answers the vexed question as to how to address asymmetric jurisdiction clauses within the Brussels I (recast). Since Brexit, the UK is neither an EU Member State nor a party to the Lugano Convention, and the implications of this decision for asymmetric jurisdiction clauses involving the English courts remain to be worked out. Written by Angharad Parry, barrister at Twenty Essex.