Re: Assignment of Copyright II

The two authors' contributions can probably still be separated, even if that of A is now miniscule. They will own copyright in their own respective parts of the whole. B's copyright will presumably be dependent on A's, so he can't do much with his bit without A's consent: but there has to be at least an implied licence in B's favour to allow him to do certain acts with A's copyright material, probably extending to prety much anything he wants given the circumstances (A's complete loss of interest, the passage of time).

Alternatively, the English courts might consider that although the legal form of an assignment (in writing, signed by the assignor) was not followed, there is an equitable assignment of the copyright dating back to when A first told B he could do take over. Whether the courts will consider this to have taken place will depend largely on what is needed for the purposes of commercial efficacy - does the arrangement only work if ownership of the copyright transfers, or will a mere licence do? The giving of consideration wil also be necessary - but the action in reliance by B, to his detriment, should suffice. If there has been an equitable assignment, B can obtain an order from the court to compel A to assign the legal title too.

This is not a very clear area of law, but this summary should cover it!

Peter Groves
Davis & Co
London
<petergroves[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Sat Apr 11 1998 - 11:02:42 GMT