Visit any street market in the world’s major cities and you will find fake Rolex watches, Prada handbags and Nike trainers. Meanwhile, the music industry threatens to sue teenagers over illegal downloads.

Probably most people in the timber industry smile wryly when they read about such “copyright piracy” but the smile is fading, as companies realise these issues affect their own added value.

UK timber companies need to compete on innovation and this means investment, whether in an invention that can be patented; a new product design that can be registered; or in a brand image, name or other materials that can be copyright or trademark protected.

As well as creating intellectual property, companies also have to defend their rights, even calling in those expensive “learned friends”, the lawyers, when necessary.

Traditionally timber companies have been reluctant to take this step. Yet, as a number of recent cases have shown, this attitude is changing and companies are fighting back against any infringement of their rights.

For example, Richard Burbidge Ltd recently took successful action against BSW Timber for alleged copyright infringement.
The dispute centred on the use of photographs of BSW decking and Richard Burbidge balustrade and technical drawings, which were the copyright of Richard Burbidge Ltd and which BSW Timber continued to use after a business relationship between the two companies ceased.

“We invest significant sums in our brand image and in our design and technical expertise,” said Richard Burbidge chief executive Steve Underhill. “This highlights the added value that customers achieve when they purchase Richard Burbidge products.

“We take legal action only as a last recourse, but we are determined to protect our intellectual property against infringements.

Other cases

“Unfortunately, we have a number of other cases in progress, as more companies now seem unwilling to make the necessary investment in innovation and prefer to ‘pirate’ our designs and developments,” he continued.

“We enjoyed a sound relationship with BSW Timber in the past and we were pleased this matter could be resolved. The financial compensation was not the issue… it is the principle of defending our intellectual property that matters.”

“This was an unfortunate dispute which arose due to an oversight and we fully recognise the importance of companies developing and protecting their own intellectual property,” added BSW Timber chief executive Paul Barham. “We are pleased this could be resolved swiftly and amicably.”

In another recent case, a dispute arose between Rowlinson Garden Products Ltd and Forest Garden plc in respect of registered and unregistered design rights.

After the issue of proceedings, terms were agreed including a payment to Rowlinson and the withdrawal of Forest Garden plc‘s product from the market place, and the matter was concluded.

“We invest time and resource in new product development and bringing new products to market,” said Paul Taylor, sales and marketing director of Rowlinson Garden Products. “As such, we believe it extremely important that we protect this investment.”

The fact these two cases involved well-known and reputable companies illustrates just how easy it is to fall foul of intellectual property laws.

Most people tend to associate “intellectual property theft” with imported products from China or other rapidly developing countries, which “copy” western designs.

Intellectual property theft

This was the case, for example, for Ainsworth, manufacturer of Pourform concrete forming panels, which discovered that panels were being imported into the UK with the orange edge seal colour, which is a recognised feature of the Ainsworth “brand” and registered as a trademark. The panels were quickly withdrawn when legal action was threatened.

There seem to be two distinct reasons why intellectual property is “pirated”: the first is simple oversight or lack of awareness of the issue and the law in company marketing departments.

The second and more sinister cause is when a product is knowingly copied. Typically this can happen when a major retailer or merchant ‘de-lists’ a manufacturer in favour of a cheaper supplier but still wants the same designs and product range. The temptation for the new supplier to copy existing items can prove irresistible.

Perhaps it’s because so many timber designs are hundreds of years old – dentil moulding patterns, for example – that companies expect to copy any design.

But as the recent legal action by Richard Burbidge and others shows, times are changing for intellectual property pirates.

As Steve Underhill concluded: “We wanted to fire a warning shot across the bows of any competitor who thought they could simply copy and imitate what we do and what makes the company successful and we won’t hesitate to take action again when necessary”.

A useful introduction to intellectual property can be found at www.patent.gov.uk.