Written by The issue of copyright infringement was recently considered in Look Design and Development Pty Ltd v Edge Developments Pty Ltd & Flaton [2022] QDC 116. In that case, Mr and Mrs Flaton had visited a display home belonging to Look Design and Development Pty Ltd (trading as Coast Life Homes). They engaged Coast Life Homes to prepare two house design plans, but then later informed Coastal Life Homes that they were unable to continue the pricing discussions, so communication between the parties ceased.
However, it was later discovered that the Flaton’s had provided a copy of one of the design plans to Edge Developments Pty Ltd (trading as Edge Designer Homes) which that company used to produce a plan and build a house according to that plan.
Coastal Life Homes brought a claim against the Flaton’s seeking a declaration that Coast Life Homes was the owner of the copyright in the design plans, damages of $50 000 under s 115 of the Copyright Act and interest and costs. They also made a claim against Edge Developments for an account of profits.
The Court found that copyright did subsist in the design plans prepared by Coastal Life Homes, and that in order for reproduction to occur, there had to be objective similarity and a causal connection between the two works. There was no direct evidence of actual copying, but the causal connection was easily satisfied because Edge Designer Homes received a copy of the plan and the objective similarity requirement was satisfied by the overall correlation of layout and dimension in each of the plans. The Flaton’s were liable for knowingly authorising the substantial reproduction of the plan but only had to pay nominal damages of $500, and Coastal Life Homes and Edge Designer Homes settled their claim for $30 000.