Melway Publishing v Robert Hicks Pty Ltd

Melway Publishing Pty Ltd (Melway) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Full Federal Court concerning the infringement of its copyright in a street directory. The dispute arose from the publication of a rival street directory by Robert Hicks Pty Ltd (Hicks), which Melway alleged had copied substantial parts of its copyrighted work.

The High Court was required to determine whether Hicks had infringed Melway's copyright. This involved considering the nature of copyright protection afforded to compilations such as street directories, the test for substantiality in copyright infringement, and the extent to which a compiler can rely on existing works in creating a new compilation. Specifically, the court had to assess whether the alleged copying constituted an appropriation of the skill, labour, and judgment of the copyright owner, or merely the use of factual information that was in the public domain.

The majority of the High Court, comprising Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Hayne, and Callinan JJ, held that copyright subsists in a street directory as a compilation, protecting the skill, labour, and judgment exercised in its creation. However, they found that the factual information contained within the directory, such as street names and locations, was not protected by copyright. The court distinguished between the expression of ideas and the ideas themselves, concluding that Hicks had not copied the expression of Melway's work but had independently gathered and presented factual information. Kirby J dissented, arguing that the extent of copying was such that it did amount to infringement.

The appeal was allowed, and the orders of the Full Federal Court were set aside.