It’s good to have received the Court of Appeal decision in this long running case.
Importantly from my client, Ms Alalääkkölä’s perspective, the Court found that:
[78] Here, it is our view that it is consistent with the overall policy objectives of the Copyright Act that Ms Alalääkkölä, as the author and creative force behind the Artworks, be able to continue to control the commercialisation of the Copyrights. It would be inappropriate and unfair to require her to transfer ownership of some of the Copyrights to Mr Palmer for a range of reasons, …….
This means that Ms Alalääkkölä succeeded on the important question of whether she was be able to control her copyright.
However, she did not get up on the wider issue of whether her copyright was relationship property or not. In terms of the wider ramifications – the Court cautioned that while Ms Alalääkkölä retained rights in and was able to control her copyright, this was because of her close attachment to her paintings, and her art more generally – and it may not apply to other authors: for example those who create engineering drawings.
Marlborough painter Sirpa Elise Alalaakkola has won her bid against her ex-husband’s claim to copyright on her work. |
|
Artist wins appeal, ex-husband fails in legal bid to get half her copyright |
