A recent 2011 decision by the Federal Court of Australia in
Dynamic Supplies Pty Limited v Tonnex International Pty
Limited1 (Dynamic Supplies)
provides further clarification on copyright protection of
compilations.
Dynamic Supplies follows a line of recent
cases2 in emphasising that, in order for a copyright
work to be original, the work must have independent
'intellectual effort'.
These cases are in contrast with the earlier line of decisions
which found that mere 'sweat-of-the-brow' is sufficient for
the determination of subsistence of copyright in compilations.
Dynamic Supplies involved a dispute between two printer
cartridge suppliers, Dynamic Supplies Pty Limited
(Dynamic) and Tonnex International Pty Ltd
(Tonnex) in relation to a compilation work
consisting of a searchable compatibility chart for printer and
computer consumables on Dynamic's website (March 2008
CVS file).
