Database protection under UK law will be discussed in two distinct phases: the analysis of database copyright as it is conceived by applying existing copyright rules and then, the evaluation of a new database regime provided by the Database Directive (“DD”) implementation and its implication on the current database copyright law.

The most recent UK copyright statute is the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (“CDPA”). The CDPA is a comprehensive codification of copyright law. Databases are hardly referred to in this Act in an explicit manner, but their existence is taken into consideration. The general provisions regarding copyright works should be considered when formulating the principles regarding database copyright. For the purposes of the CDPA, ‘Copyright work’ means a work “in which copyright subsists”. The CDPA does not contain a definition of a ‘work’, instead a description of eligible categories of works is laid down. So, in order to claim copyright in databases, one has to be able to demonstrate that a database falls within one of the categories. The commonly held opinion is that a database, for the purposes of protection under the CDPA, is a compilation.

A ‘computer program’ and a ‘cable program’ are two classes of works which can be attributed to databases under the CDPA if certain specified conditions are fulfilled. Strangely enough, nearly all of the other classes of works mentioned in the CDPA may be attributed to a database in terms of defining their eligibility for copyright protection. This means that one could find arguments to support the description of a given database as a film, as a ‘design document’ and even as ‘sound recording. However, it seems that these attempts do not stand on firm ground. Either they regard a specific species of databases as representing the essence and nature of databases or they disregard basic principles as the distinction between the database and its components or the distinction between works in digital form and databases.

Since the implementing of the DD through Regulations, a definition of the term ‘database’ has been inserted into the CDPA. Consequently, the meaning of a literary work within the CDPA now includes a ‘database’ and has been distinguished from a compilation. The implementation of the DD generally preserves the existing database copyright protection.. However, this approach also maintains the existing anomalies regarding database copyright in the UK.

The Regulations amend the CDPA regarding user’s rights in databases. Hence, any act, which otherwise infringes copyright and is necessary for the purpose of access and use of the database content is permitted. This assertion is significant regarding digital databases, when acts of access and use inevitably reproduce the database or part of it.

American copyright law distinguishes between three categories of copyright works: creative works, derivative works and compiled works or compilations. A creative work is a composition that owns its origin to his author. A database, as an organised collection of materials, do not fall under these types of works. Derivative works are works which are based on previously authored and originated works. Databases do not seem to be caught by this definition, although it is common for materials to be incorporated into a database that are considered derivative works.