[1]
Bently, L. et al. 2018. Chapter 10, from:  Intellectual Property Law. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[2]
Bently, L. et al. 2018. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[3]
Bently, L. and Sherman, B. 2018. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[4]
Bently, L. and Sherman, B. 2018. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[5]
Bently, L. and Sherman, B. 2018. Intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[6]
C-393/09 Bezpečnostní softwarová asociace - Svaz softwarové ochrany v Ministerstvo kultury [2011] ECDR 3: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=C-393/09.
[7]
Derclaye, E. 2014. Assessing the impact and reception of the Court of Justice of the European Union case law on UK copyright law: what does the future hold? Revue Internationale du Droit d’auteur. 240, (2014), 5–117.
[8]
Derclaye, E. 2013. Debunking some of UK copyright law’s longstanding myths and misunderstandings. Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2013).
[9]
Derclaye, E. 2010. Wonderful or worrisome? The impact of the ECJ ruling in Infopaq on UK copyright law. European Intellectual Property Review. 32, 5 (2010).
[10]
Gerald Dworkin Moral rights in English law - the shape of rights to come. European Intellectual Property Review.
[11]
Griffiths, J. 2013. Dematerialization, Pragmatism and the European Copyright Revolution. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 33, 4 (2013), 767–790. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqt017.
[12]
Griffiths, J. 2014. Pre-empting conflict - a re-examination of the public interest defence in UK copyright law. Legal Studies. 34, 1 (2014), 76–102. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/lest.12006.
[13]
Holyoak, J. and Torremans, P. 1995. Intellectual property law. Butterworths.
[14]
Jane C. Ginsburg Moral rights in a common law system. Entertainment Law Review.
[15]
Patrick Masiyakurima The futility of the idea/expression dichotomy in UK copyright law. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law.
[16]
Rahmatian, A. 2013. Originality in UK Copyright Law: The Old "Skill and Labour” Doctrine Under Pressure. IIC - International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. 44, 1 (2013), 4–34. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-012-0003-4.
[17]
Stina Teilmann Framing the law: the right of integrity in Britain. European Intellectual Property Review.
[18]
Torremans, P. and Holyoak, J. 2016. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[19]
Torremans, P. and Holyoak, J. 2016. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[20]
Torremans, P. and Holyoak, J. 2016. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[21]
Torremans, P. and Holyoak, J. 2016. Holyoak and Torremans intellectual property law. Oxford University Press.
[22]
W.R. Cornish 1989. Moral rights under the 1988 Act. European Intellectual Property Review. 11, 12 (1989).
[23]
2003. Acknowledging the conflict between copyright law and freedom of expression under the Human Rights Act. Entertainment Law Review. (2003).
[24]
2008. An Intentional View of the Copyright Work. Modern Law Review. 71, 4 (Jul. 2008), 535–558. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2008.00705.x.
[25]
Ashdown v Telegraph Group Ltd [2002] Ch 149.
[26]
Baigent v Random House Group Ltd [2006] EWHC 719 (Ch).
[27]
1998. British film copyright and the incorrect implementation of the E.C. Copyright Directives. Entertainment Law Review. (1998).
[28]
C-5/08 Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening [2009] ECDR 16.
[29]
C-5/08 Infopaq International A/S v Danske Dagblades Forening [2009] ECDR 16.
[30]
C-604/10 Football Dataco Ltd v Yahoo! UK Ltd [2012] 2 CMLR 24.
[31]
2010. Copyright and Its Categories of Original Works. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 30, 2 (Jun. 2010), 229–254. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqq009.
[32]
2000. Copyright in photographs. European Intellectual Property Review. (2000).
[33]
2002. Copyright law after Ashdown - time to deal fairly with the public. Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2002).
[34]
Creation Records v News Group Newspapers [1997] EMLR 444.
[35]
Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2000] 1 WLR 2416.
[36]
Designers Guild Ltd v Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2000] 1 WLR 2416.
[37]
Francis Day & Hunter v Bron [1963] Ch 587.
[38]
Green v Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand [1989] 2 All ER 1056.
[39]
Hubbard v Vosper [1972] 2 QB 84.
[40]
Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland [2001] Ch 143.
[41]
2001. Joy: a reply. Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2001).
[42]
2000. ‘Joy’ for the claimant: can a film also be protected as a dramatic work? Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2000).
[43]
Ladbroke (Football) Ltd v William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 273.
[44]
Lucasfilm Ltd & Ors v Ainsworth & Anor [2011] UKSC 39 (27 July 2011).
[45]
Morrison Leahy Music Limited v Lightbond Limited [1995] EMLR 144.
[46]
Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer plc [2003] 1 AC 551.
[47]
Newspaper Licensing Agency Ltd v Marks and Spencer plc [2003] 1 AC 551.
[48]
Norowzian v Arks Ltd (No2) [2000] FSR 363.
[49]
Norowzian v Arks Ltd (No2) [2000] FSR 363.
[50]
Pasterfield v Denham [1999] FSR 168.
[51]
2001. Photographing paintings in the public domain: a response to Garnett. European Intellectual Property Review. (2001).
[52]
2002. Preserving judicial freedom of movement - interpreting fair dealing in copyright law. Intellectual Property Quarterly. (2002).
[53]
Pro Sieben Media AG v Carlton UK Television Ltd [1999] 1 WLR 605.
[54]
Sawkins v Hyperion Records Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 565 [2005] 3 All ER 636.
[55]
Sawkins v Hyperion Records Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 565 [2005] 3 All ER 636.
[56]
2014. Test of infringement: what is it now? European intellectual property review. (2014).
[57]
2004. The compatibility of the skill and labour originality standard with the Berne Convention and the TRIPs Agreement. European Intellectual Property Review. (2004).
[58]
2001. The hedgehog and the fox, a substantial part of the law of copyright? European Intellectual Property Review. (2001).
[59]
1995. The idea/expression dichotomy and the games that people play. European Intellectual Property Review. (1995).
[60]
University of London Press v University Tutorial Press [1916] 2 Ch 601.