If you are commissioned to create copyright material, even in the absence of a contract, it is assumed that there is an implied licence given to the person who commissioned the material to use it for the purposes made known at the time it was commissioned. Copyright remains with the person who created it, in the absence of a written assignment, signed by the creator.
AustraliaIntellectual Property
Key Points
- If you are commissioned to create copyright material, even in the absence of a contract, it is assumed that there is an implied licence given to the person who commissioned the material to use it for the purposes made known at the time it was commissioned. Copyright remains with the person who created it, in the absence of a written assignment, signed by the creator.
- Copyright infringement often turns on whether a substantial part of the work has been taken.
It's not unusual for the copyright in commissioned works to remain with the creator; the person who commissioned it is usually assumed to have an implied licence to use the work. A common example of this is in the construction industry, where architects are often part of the development consortium and provide the plans for the project without charging professional fees. But is this assumption wrong? A recent decision of the full Federal Court of Australia suggests it is, with troubling implications not only
We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.
