A ruling by the High Court’s Intellectual Property Enterprise Court has dismissed copyright claims made by WaterRower (UK) Ltd against Liking Ltd, a Hong Kong-based manufacturer of rowing machines. This landmark judgement, which underscores key distinctions between UK and EU interpretations of copyright law, concludes that WaterRower’s machines do not qualify as “works of artistic craftsmanship” and are therefore ineligible for copyright protection under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
WaterRower claimed that their water-resistance rowing machines embodied unique artistic craftsmanship, warranting copyright protection, and argued that Liking Ltd’s Topiom rowing machines infringed upon this intellectual property. However, Judge Campbell Forsyth ruled that while WaterRower’s machines demonstrate skilled design, they do not meet the specific UK legal standard for artistic craftsmanship necessary to secure copyright protection. The ruling provides new clarity on copyright eligibility for 3D functional objects within the UK, diverging from EU precedents that have offered broader interpretations.
Albright IP, representing Liking Ltd in the UK, welcomed the court’s decision. Cloe Loo, Albright IP’s Patent Director and lead IP attorney for Liking Ltd, described the case as a “milestone” in the UK’s IP sector. She highlighted the court’s clarification on copyright law, particularly for 3D objects that serve functional purposes without qualifying as sculpture or artistic craftsmanship. “For years, differing interpretations across the UK and EU have created uncertainty around the copyright protection of such objects,” Loo said. “This judgement brings much-needed clarity, establishing a test for artistic craftsmanship that 3D objects must meet to qualify for copyright protection.”
Loo’s involvement in the case required navigating numerous complexities, including coordinating with her Hong Kong-based client across time zones and language barriers. Communicating UK copyright law’s nuances in Chinese was essential, Loo noted, ensuring that Liking Ltd understood each step of the case. “This case required not only a robust IP strategy but also an awareness of Liking Ltd’s language and business culture,” she explained.
Robert Games, Managing Director of Albright IP, praised Loo’s efforts in managing the case’s challenges and praised her ability to guide the team through high-stakes litigation involving multiple languages. “Cloe’s exceptional handling of this case highlights her expertise and dedication,” he said, noting the impact the decision will have on IP law. “Her work was key to achieving a positive outcome for our client, and it underscores Albright IP’s strength in complex international IP cases.”
The judgement is anticipated to have significant implications for the intellectual property industry, especially concerning copyright protection for functional 3D objects like machinery and appliances. It reinforces the UK’s unique stance on copyright law, especially following Brexit, in contrast with EU courts, which have previously offered a wider interpretation of copyright eligibility for functional designs. Although WaterRower may appeal the decision, legal experts say the case has already contributed to a clearer understanding of the UK’s legal framework surrounding artistic craftsmanship.
This decision sets a precedent, offering UK companies guidance on copyright’s limitations concerning functional 3D objects and highlighting the distinctions between copyright and design rights.