Businesses will be held liable for employee copyright breaches

A High Court judgment has demonstrated that the courts will hold businesses liable if employees breach copyright.

In the recent case of Phonographic Performance Ltd (PPL) vs John Nash, the claimant was successful in an application to grant summary relief and secure an injunction against a music bar and nightclub owner for persistent copyright infringement.

PPL brought an action against John Nash for authorising the playing of music at the venue without being licensed to do so. Nash was aware PPL held the public performance rights in the recordings so PPL pursued an injunction to stop him from continually infringing its copyright.

Resisting an application for summary judgment, Nash argued he was merely an employee of the company that operated the venue. He stated that he didn't trade from the premises on his own account and he wasn't the 'controlling mind' of any company operating from the venue.

Judge Pelling QC, however, agreed with PPL, claiming it was clear that Nash was not just an employee and there was evidence of his continuing role as the responsible office holder under the licensing legislation.

The judge further ruled that even if the court did accept Nash was only an employee, this was no defence to copyright infringement and he wouldn't be able to avoid personal liability on that basis.

Laurence Gilmore, a partner in the entertainment, media and intellectual property department at Hamlins, which represented PPL, commented: "This is an important ruling confirming that being an employee is no defence to an action for copyright infringement, and that the courts will support copyright holders' attempts to stop this behaviour.

"It also means that employers will also be vicariously liable for these wrongs committed by their employees. The employers will also be liable for any licence fees or damages for infringement of copyright."

John van der Luit-Drummond is legal reporter for Solicitors Journal

Copyright & permissions