The essay explores some recent controversies in British music copyright through the evolving technologies used to perform or play music in the courtroom. Whilst the conceptual tension between cases has caused doctrinal anxiety about the effect of popular music in copyright, the essay contends that the recent stream of music copyright cases can be considered from a historical perspective, taking into account the tools, materials and experts as they featured in court. In doing so, the essay connects a history of legal expertise to the emergence of new technologies whilst arguing that legal knowledge about music copyright was, in fact, stabilized in the courtroom.

Copyright and its relationship with popular music is one of the most disputed issues amongst music and copyright scholars. While some have accused copyright of being blind (or deaf) to the particularities of popular music, others have defended its significance within the industry. This article contributes to this debate by tracing the networks of connections between lawyers, musicians, and clerks that emerged in a formative period in British pop music (the Sixties). It considers how their collaborative efforts and strategies to present evidence in copyright infringement trials were articulated in an attempt to influence music copyright infringement tests in Britain. By highlighting the concrete geographical and temporal contexts from which these networks emerged and their particular contingencies, the article also casts a new light on the impact of the legal profession on copyright, showing a practice‐oriented and historically situated way of observing differences between French and British copyright systems.

No abstract

No abstract

The essay explores the interactive role of experts in the construction of the intangible object in copyright law. It pays special attention to the interventions and eventual connections of a British design consultant and fashion designer, Victor Herbert, in different copyright cases such as the well-known Designers Guild Ltd v. Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2001]. The article traces the background of his early court appearances as an expert witness and the range of visual techniques and experiments he developed to “materialize” the incorporeal in copyright law.