New technology, such as CD-Rom, CDi and the internet, offers the potential to reap enormous revenues from existing libraries of books, films, music and other forms of creative endeavour.

But can the owners of these catalogues be confident that they are entitled to exploit their assets in these new formats? What is the publisher's position in current UK law where there is no written agreement, or where the agreement is unclear as to the media in respect of which a grant or licence has been made? And what developments on the European and international levels are likely to affect commercial activity in the new media in the years ahead?To publish a copyright work in a book, newspaper or magazine, or indeed in any of the new multi-media formats, a publisher must be the copyright owner or licensee of its contents.

If the author of the relevant copyright work has entered a written agreement with the publisher granting an assignment or licence in the relevant format, the publisher will be entitled to publish.If the author creates a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work in the course of his or her employment, the employer is the first owner of any copyright in the work, subject to any agreement to the contrary (s.11(2) of the Copyright Des igns and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988)).

In such circumstances the employer is entitled to exploit the copyright work in any media.The position of freelance contributors without a written agreement is more complex.

This is of particular concern to the newspaper and magazine industry.

Articles and photographs are customarily submitted by freelancers at short notice for insertion in a forthcoming publication.

In return contributors receive a fee, often agreed after the event.

In such circumstances a publisher is generally regarded by custom as having been granted an implied, non-exclusive licence to publish the work.However, it may be questioned whether that licence would be construed so as to allow the publisher to exploit the contributor's work in any format other than the traditional printed page.

It is arguable, for example, that a photographer who submits material to a magazine does not grant a licence to reproduce that material in a CD-Rom catalogue of the magazine's earlier issues.

Equally, if the magazine were to be transmitted - as a number of newspapers are starting to be - on the internet, it may be doubted whether the photographer's consent to reproduce could be implied.With time, assuming a custom develops, the courts may be more inclined to imply a wider licence to permit reproduction in other formats.

Until then, publishers would be advised, as a minimum action, to notify contributors of their intentions in advance.

Clearly a written agreement would be preferable.Book publishers moving into CD-Rom or CDi need to ensure that licences are obtained for all copyright works reproduced in the new product.

Thus a publisher of a music encyclopaedia on CD-Rom may require licences from the copyright owners of the prose, graphics, sheet music and sound recordings, and may need to obtain performers' consents.Even if the publisher can establish that it has an implied licence to reproduce in the new media format, that will not be sufficient to entitle it to institute proceedings for infringement of copyright in the underlying work.

That right is reserved to copyright owners and exclusive licensees (s.96(1) and s.101(1) of the CDPA 1988).

The publisher can only acquire such rights from a freelance contributor if it has a written agreement.In the absence of such rights, the publisher might consider instituting proceedings to prevent reproduction of its material in a new format by relying on the separate copyright afforded to the 'typographical arrangement of a published edition' (s.15 of the CDPA 1988).

Though those terms are not defined, the section aims to protect the publisher's skill and effort in creating the layout of a published work.

So, for example, if a newspaper were transmitted on the internet, and reproduction of that transmission was made by a third party without permission, the newspaper would have difficulty showing locus standi to sue if the part that had been reproduced was an article or photograph where no assignment or exclusive licence had been granted.In such circumstances, the newspaper might seek to rely on its rights in the typographical arrangement of the part that has been copied.

Such proceedings would not be straightforward.

To establish that a single page from an internet publication constituted a published edition might require each page to be transmitted separately, albeit only microseconds apart from other pages.

Proceedings on this basis would evidently be a measure of last resort.The moral rights of freelance contributors may also be a source of difficulty in the context of the new medi a.

The right of paternity (s.77 of the CDPA 1988) is specifically exempted in the case of employees who produce works in the course of their employment (s.79(3)(a) of the CDPA 1988).

In freelance cases, the publisher of a newspaper or magazine currently relies on the exemption of the right 'in relation to publication in a newspaper, magazine or similar periodical...of a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work made for purposes of such publication' (s.79(6) of the CDPA 1988).It is unclear whether a newspaper or magazine reproduced on CD-Rom or on the internet would constitute a 'similar periodical'.

If not, a freelance contributor who had asserted the right of paternity might be able to institute proceedings for infringement of the right, though we consider that such an interpretation would not succeed.Further, the new media may allow manipulation of data by the user.

Paintings, photographs and drawings (and indeed sound recordings) may be distorted using home computers and re-transmitted on the internet.

Such actions could be regarded as infringing an author's right to object to derogation of his or her work (s.80 of the CDPA 1988), not to mention an infringement of copyright in the underlying work.Tentative explorations by the European Commission to look into possible harmonisation of moral rights across member states took place during 1991 and 1992.

However, no initiatives have been pursued.In the meantime, on both the European and international levels, copyright is being fundamentally re-evaluated in an effort to accommodate the rapidly changing technological and commercial reality being imposed by the new media.

Publishers have a great deal to gain and much at stake as the structure of copyright law comes under scrutiny in Brussels and at WIPO in Geneva.

There are potentially far-reaching effects commercially if the present UK legislation is amended as a result.The Delors white paper entitled 'Growth, competitiveness and employment', which was adopted by the European Council in December 1993, opened the debate on the major trends and progress of the 'information society'.

The white paper identified the audio-visual sector as showing the greatest potential for growth.In July 1994, the Commission announced its intention to publish a green paper on copyright and neighbouring rights in the information society by mid-1995.

The green paper is likely to examine the extent to which the existing copyright regime - European measures together with national legislation - can be adapted to cope with the new multi-media technologies.The European draft Directive on the legal protection of databases, currently before the council working group, is likely to serve as the 'platform' legislation upon which future multi-media copyright regulation will be based.

A key issue is the potential reduction in protection for some UK databases including, for example, electronically held marketing lists and archival material.

Other issues under discussion include:-- whether the Directive should apply at all to databases where the underlying contents are themselves copyright works;-- whether the Directive should apply to electronic databases only, or whether manual databases should be included as well.

The current definition of 'database' is 'a collection of data, works or other materials arranged, stored and accessed by electronic means, and the materials necessary for the operation of the database such as its source, index or system for obtaining or presenting information'.

This definition is wide enough to include the digitised contents of multi-media products;-- copyright ownership where a database is created during the course of employment.

Art 3.4 provides that where a database is created by an employee in the execution of his duties or following the instructions given by his employer, the employer exclusively shall be entitled to exercise all economic rights in the database so created unless otherwise provided by contract.

There are moves by some member states to delete this provision, notwithstanding that the (already implemented) Software Directive is a precedent for its inclusion; and-- the introduction of a 'sui generis right' which would apply to those UK databases which do not contain sufficient 'originality' in their selection or arrangement to be covered by copyright as defined by the new Directive.

This unfair competition right would entitle a plaintiff to sue for damages for unauthorised extraction and commercial re-utilisation of a substantial portion of the database.

This right is drafted to subsist for 15 years from the creation of the database, although a 'substantial change' to the database would commence a new 15-year term of protection.On an international level, WIPO is examining a possible protocol to the Berne Convention.

The concept of a sui generis right, similar to that outlined in the EU draft database Directive, is under consideration.Publishers will be major content providers for the new media formats.

Their intellectual property rights in that content will be a valuable asset which they may choose to exploit on their own or by way of joint ventures with owners of the delivery infrastructure.

Digitisation, increased rapidity of transmission, and potential ease of copying - either electronically or by transformation to analogue form - may mean that new rights will need to be created to protect and enforce publishers' rights.New systems to aid enforcement may need to be established, for example digital identification codes of rights owners.

The role of collecting societies to facilitate royalty collection is also likely to be re-examined.

Publishers will need to assess the viability of any new rights put forward and ensure that any newly developed systems for rights enforcement and payment are practicable.