Protecting The IP Rights of World Leader in Immersive Art

Our client was a global leader in immersive art experiences, having welcomed more than eight million visitors to its US exhibitions since 2021.

The client brought copyright infringement proceedings against a UK‑based immersive art provider in relation to an exhibition staged in England. The litigation was complex due to the number of works alleged to have been infringed and the layered nature of those works, each of which could be broken down into multiple copyright‑protected elements. Further complexity arose from the fact that each work involved multiple contributors, often led by a head designer coordinating large creative teams. Additional issues related to former employees, their nationality and residency, and the implications of works created overseas for questions of copyright ownership and entitlement under UK law.

We undertook a detailed review of a substantial volume of material to establish the chain of ownership for each copyright‑protected work. We worked closely with the client’s general counsel and senior in‑house lawyer, forming a trusted working relationship that enabled open discussion of complex legal issues and litigation strategy, often across time zones with the US‑based team. Our approach to the litigation was careful and strategic. We used targeted requests for further information to clarify the defendant’s position and avoided premature mediation until the factual and legal issues were fully understood. This ensured the client’s position was advanced with clarity, focus, and commercial realism.

The proceedings were resolved on confidential terms in March 2025. The outcome brought the dispute to a close without the need for trial, allowing the client to protect its intellectual property rights while avoiding the additional cost, time, and uncertainty associated with ongoing litigation

Piers Strickland, who was supported on this transaction by Henry Smith-Higgins, commented: “Waterfront’s deep knowledge of copyright law, combined with its expertise in litigating complex copyright claims, was crucial in this case.”