In a rare decision on whether copyright subsists in the format of a TV show, the UK High Court (IPEC) has rejected a claim for copyright infringement (Rinkoff v Baby Cow Productions Ltd). Despite the format licensing industry being in rude health, the case serves as a reminder of the difficulty in enforcing rights in formats.
The claim
The claimant, Joshua Rinkoff, a writer and comedian, alleged that Baby Cow Productions Ltd had infringed his copyright in the format of his comedy series "Shambles". Rinkoff claimed that the defendant's series "Live at the Moth Club" (LATMC) copied the format of "Shambles," which combined live stand-up performances with a behind-the-scenes sitcom. Rinkoff argued that his format was protected as a dramatic work under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Baby Cow Productions Ltd, a well-known producer of comedy shows, denied the allegations, asserting that the format of "Shambles" was not protectable as a dramatic work and that there was no copying of any protectable elements.
Decision
The judge found that the format of "Shambles" did not qualify as a dramatic work capable of copyright protection. In reaching her decision the judge cited the fact that at least two conditions must be met before a format will be protected as a dramatic work:
- there must be a number of clearly identified features which, taken together, distinguish the show from other similar shows.
- the distinguishing features must be connected with each other in a coherent framework which can be repeatedly applied so as to enable the show to be reproduced in recognisable form.
She concluded that the eight features identified by Rinkoff as constituting the format were too general and lacked the necessary specificity and coherence to be considered a unified work capable of performance. The judge noted that the features were not consistently present in every episode of "Shambles" and did not provide a detailed framework that could be repeatedly applied to reproduce the show in a recognisable form. She found that even if the format were protectable, there was no evidence of copying by Baby Cow Productions Ltd. The similarities between "Shambles" and "LATMC" were deemed to be at a high level of generality and did not suggest that the latter had copied the former.
Significance for the creative industries
This judgment will be of interest to those working with TV formats and other forms of content. The case highlights the challenges of claiming copyright protection for a format, as it requires a high level of specificity and coherence to be considered a dramatic work. To date, copyright has never been found to subsist in a TV format in this jurisdiction.
The decision underscores the importance of clearly defining and documenting the unique elements of a format to establish it as a protectable work. This contrasts with the outcome in the Shazam case, where the court found that the characters and storylines were sufficiently described to enjoy protection as a dramatic work. The key difference appears to be in the level of detail and specificity provided in the Shazam case, which was found lacking in Rinkoff's claim.
For producers and creators, this case serves as a reminder to carefully consider the legal protections available for their creative concepts and to ensure that their formats are recorded in a sufficiently detailed way (e.g. a 'bible'). The judgment also emphasises the need for clear evidence of copying when alleging infringement, as general similarities between works may not be sufficient to establish a claim.
This article is for informational purposes only. Seek legal advice.
