The Legal 500

HANOVER HOUSE, 14 HANOVER SQUARE, LONDON, W1S 1HP, ENGLAND
Tel:
Work 020 7667 5000
Fax:
Fax 020 7667 5100
DX:
44617 MAYFAIR
Web:
www.harbottle.com
Email:

Mark Phillips

Tel:
Work +44 20 7667 5000
Email:
Harbottle & Lewis LLP

Work Department

Company and commercial group

Position

Partner in the company and commercial group, the publishing group and joint head of interactive entertainment and the e-commerce/technology group, specialising in corporate, commercial and copyright work for media and communications industries, particularly video games, book and magazine publishing and new media.

Career

Articled Clifford Chance; qualified 1986; partner Harbottle & Lewis 1990 to present date.

Languages

French.

Member

Society for Computers and Law.

Education

Manchester Grammar School; University College, London (1982 LLB Hons 1st); College of Law.

Leisure

Cycling, running, art and films; director Performing Arts Labs Ltd, member of Steering group of Edinburgh Interactive Entertainment Festival.

Practice Areas

Corporate and commercial; Electronic commerce; Media and entertainment

Back to index

Legal Developments by:
Harbottle & Lewis LLP

  • Account of profits v damages: when and why does it matter?

    Since 2007, Experience Hendrix LLC(Hendrix) and Times Newspapers Ltd (Times) have been litigating over the intellectual property rights (IPR) in a recording of a Jimi Hendrix concert that took place at the Royal Albert Hall in February 1969. In September 2006 Times distributed a free CD, or covermount, with each edition of The Sunday Times . A claim was issued against Times in March 2007 for infringement of copyright and performers’ rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. In March 2008 the High Court held that Times had infringed the IPR in the recording and Hendrix elected to have an inquiry as to damages in respect of that infringement. The case has given rise to some complex issues as to the basis for the quantification of damages, and the inquiry is due to be heard next year, but the case is also a reminder of more general considerations in relation to remedies in IPR cases, and why the basis for quantification of those remedies can have far reaching consequences for a successful claimant.

    - Harbottle & Lewis LLP

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to