Copy Rights Law: Author’s Rights

Introduction
There have been numerous modern predictions of the imminent demise of copyright law as an effective means of protecting creative labour . However, while practical solutions to the problem of piracy are being evolved, there is little sign of copyright law’s decline. New and more comprehensive copyright law ties have been adopted, the scope of copyright law protection has expanded and sanctions for infringement have been strengthened. Copyright and intellectual property protections in general, seem to be in rude good health.
However, this rapid development is not to be welcomed without reservation. Laws must be strong enough to foster conditions in which creative work will flourish. However, the powers granted to intellectual property owners must not be so strong that they unduly harm the public interest. This simple, but significant, point is made during the Preamble to the 1996 World Intellectual Property Organisation Copyright Treaty which recognised:
... the need to maintain a balance between the rights of authors and the larger public interest, particularly education, research and access to information ....
It can be argued that recent over-enthusiastic bolstering of intellectual property rights risks harming this ‘larger public interest’. Legislative initiatives, largely international or supra-national, have paid little attention towards the need to ensure to the balance described above is maintained.
There are a number of reasons for this. Digitisation and other technological developments have threatened the practical effectiveness of copyright law. Copying, manipulation and distribution of copyright law works have been transformed into straightforward, and common, activities. There has been an understandable desire to introduce measures ensuring a continuing incentive to produce creative works. However, in such circumstances, a view that more intellectual property is necessarily a good thing has become prevalent . This has been fostered and cultivated by organisations lobbying on behalf of right-owners. By comparison, there has been very little lobbying in favour of the more diffuse interest in access to copyright works . Law-makers have failed into their duty to protect this public interest.
Such failure derives in part from the complexities of intellectual property law and in part from a more general ‘democratic deficit’. Decisions are taken at international level and, despite consultation exercises, beyond public scrutiny. New laws result more from high-level compromise between interest groups than from a disinterested attempt to weigh up fundamental arguments about copyright policy. In addition, within the European Economic Area, harmonisation has resulted in a further tilting of the balance in favour of intellectual property owners; these are two very different traditions that of common law copyright and civil law droit d’auteur have had to be approximated. Inside the civil law tradition, right-owners have generally been accorded a high level of protection. However, there has been a corresponding unwillingness to accept works in the direction of the copyright canon unless they demonstrate a high degree of creativity. The opposite has generally been true within the common law tradition, which is less precious about, for example, compulsory licensing and moral rights, but accords protection to tremely mundane works . The model chosen for union of the two traditions has brought together the more protectionist elements of both systems the higher level of protection accorded to right-owners in civil law jurisdictions and the inclusive approach to protection adopted traditionally in common law states. The resulting impact upon the ‘balance’ of interests in copyright law is easy to discern.
In the context of this legislative failure, the task of ensuring that copyright laws (and intellectual property laws in general) do not operate against the public interest has, within the UK, fallen to the judiciary . There is ex growing evidence of judicial disquiet at the untrammelled growth in intellectual property protection described above. The extent to which judges can determine the direction taken by the law is limited by constitutional propriety. However, justification can be found for judicial activism in this area in a developing acceptance of purposive and rights-based approaches to statutory interpretation .
This review of recent developments in UK copyright law is written against this background. It aims to look back over the last year and to identify the most significant developments within this period. It also seeks to demonstrate how these developments illustrate the more general trends outlined above, in particular judicial activism in the restraint of monopoly. This year is a suitable subject for such an analysis. There have been a series of interesting decisions of the UK courts and of the Copyright Tribunal. A number are considered into the sections below, each of which focuses upon a traditional subject division within the law of copyright.It is not contended that all of the decisions support the assessment of general trends outlined above. Nevertheless, judicial concern to maintain the ‘balance between the rights of authors in the case of literary and dramatic works and the larger public interest’ is clearly discernible.

Subsistence of Copyright law
In the UK, copyright ‘subsists’ only in those forms of ‘work’ set out in the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (‘CDPA’) . Thus, for example, copyright subsists in a label for a sweet tin (an ‘artistic work’) and in instructions for the application of fertiliser (a ‘literary work’) . However, it does not subsist in, for example, an individual but mass-produced suite of furniture or in a database which does not constitute its author’s ‘own intellectual creation of literary and dramatic works ‘. Questions of subsistence are questions as to whether a particular item is the sort of ‘work’ protected by copyright legislation. Norowzian v. Arks Limited (No.2), discussed below, raises the question of whether or not a particular experimental film is a protected ‘dramatic work’. It clearly illustrates judicial concern to prevent intellectual property rights from being expanded without clear legislative mandate.

Norowzian v. Arks Limited (No. 2)
The claimant in this case had directed a short film entitled ‘Joy’. Its most striking feature was with the intention of the actor appeared to perform sudden changes of position that could not in reality have occurred as successive movements. This effect was achieved by means of a technique called ‘jump-cutting’. This was applied on the road to the film following the recording of the actor’s actual movements. The defendants, who had seen the claimant’s film, were responsible for a film advertising Guinness. This film, called ‘Anticipation’ employed a similar ‘jump-cutting’ technique. The claimant sued for infringement of copyright, claiming that his film was protected under the CDPA as a ‘film’ and as the recording of an underlying ‘dramatic work’ .
The particular issue before Rattee J in Norowzian v. Arks Limited (No. 2) was the validity of the claim to protection of the film as a ‘dramatic work’. Having confirmed that a film can ‘fix’ a previously unrecorded dramatic work, he went on to consider the requirements for protection as a ‘dramatic work’. Referring inside the direction of the earlier decision of the Privy Council in Green v. Broadcasting Corporation of New Zealand, he found that a ‘dramatic work’ had to ‘... be capable of being, physically performed’ . ‘Joy’ did not come within this definition because it was:
... as a result of the drastic editing process adopted by Mr Norowzian ... not a recording of anything that was, or could be, performed or danced by anyone .
This decision is, in some respects, rather conservative. It could be argued to facilitate there is little reason for a court to distinguish between post-filming editing techniques and other artificial, albeit more physical, contributions towards the development of a drama, or dramatic work for example smokescreens, hoists and rapid changes of scenery. Rattee J acknowledged that his decision revealed a gap in copyright protection. However, he considered that it was not up to him to fill that ‘... lacuna by giving a forced construction headed for the meaning of the term "dramatic work" as used in the Act’ .

Authorship of Copyright Works
The ‘author’ of a copyright work is generally its ‘creator’ or the person responsible for the conditions of its creation . Sometimes, where a number of individuals make contributions to a work, the identity of a work’s legal ‘author’ can be uncertain. A number of recent UK cases have considered the circumstances in which ‘joint’ authorship can arise. The most recent of these is Park J’s decision in Hadley v. Kemp.

Hadley v. Kemp
These proceedings arose from the dissolution of the pop group, Spandau Ballet. The claimants were all former members of this group. The first defendant was also a former member of the group and the second defendant was his recording company. The claimants brought proceedings for breach of contract and infringement of copyright. Neither was successful. The claim for copyright infringement was based upon an assertion so as to the claimants and the first defendants were joint authors of the group’s songs. They did not dispute with the intention of the defendant’s primary role in composing music and lyrics entitled him to a share in the resulting copyright. However, they claimed that, in rehearsing and performing the songs, they had contributed sufficient labour and skill to be joint authors.
Park J reviewed a number of recent decisions on the requirements for the creation of a ‘joint work’ . He was satisfied that, save for one particular song, the case before him could be distinguished from previous cases of communal creation. When the first defendant presented his compositions on the way to the rest of the group, they were substantially complete. The claimants performed their various parts of the songs within their own individual ways but, as such, their contribution was towards the performance rather than the creation of the works. In Fylde Microsystems Ltd v. Key Radio Systems Ltd . Laddie J had found that the contribution made to a software product by beta-testers was not a contribution of the ‘right kind of skill and labour’ . Park J applied the same phrase just before the contribution of the claimants in Hadley .
A reasonably clear picture of the form of contribution necessary to give rise to a successful claim of joint authorship is now beginning to emerge. It is necessary to distinguish both contributions coming too early within the process of a work’s creation (mere ‘ideas’)and those which come too late (such as post-creation testing and performance) from those ‘significant’ contributions at the point of creation giving rise to a copyright interest. It is also interesting to compare the requirement that a contribution to a joint work must be ‘significant’ with the relatively low level of originality required to give rise to a copyright work in the first place. The underlying practical justice of this distinction is set out from the judgement.
... all the cases ... agree that, if two or more persons are joint authors, they own the copyright in equal shares (unless of course they have made an agreement which specifies different shares) .

Infringement of Copyright
Infringement of copyright law occurs when an ‘act restricted by copyright in a work’ is carried out without the copyright owner’s permission . Issues of infringement arise when the court has to decide whether or not a particular use of a work falls inside the statutory definition of the restricted acts. Within the last year, the UK courts have had to resolve a series of questions relating to the definitions of infringement contained by the CDPA .
The following two decisions are amongst the most interesting.

1. Designers Guild Limited v. Russell Williams (Textiles) Limited
The claimant in these proceedings, D.G.L., designed and manufactured wallpaper and fabrics. One of its employees had designed a pattern for use on a fabric. The pattern (‘Ixia’) consisted of stripes with flowers scattered over them in an impressionistic manner. D.G.L. alleged with the aim of the copyright in this design was infringed by the defendant’s fabric design, ‘Marguerite’. At first instance, Lawrence Collins Q.C, had found that, despite differences, there was an overall objective similarity between the patterns. He also found that the defendant had had an opportunity to copy ‘Ixia’ and that, in ‘Marguerite’, a ‘substantial part’ of DGL’s design was reproduced .
On appeal, the Court of Appeal upturned this decision. Morritt LJ found that a ‘substantial part’ of ‘Ixia’ had not been reproduced in ‘Marguerite’. The similarities between the two designs were at the level of ‘idea’ and ‘technique’ rather than of ‘expression’. In a sense, this disagreement is largely one of impression. Nevertheless, interesting points arise from the judgement. First, the standard of review in such a case is noteworthy. Morritt LJ stated that:
In some cases, the judge at first instance is in a better position than this court to make findings of fact. This is perceptibly the case where the credibility of the witnesses is involved. ... Had the issue of substantiality depended on the judge’s assessment of witnesses then I would have been reluctant to differ from his conclusions ... as it is I consider that this court is in a good a position as the judge to reach a conclusion on the issue and should therefore do so .
The question of whether a ‘substantial part’ of a copyright work has been reproduced was also found to be an issue for objective determination by the judge. The combination of these two findings is likely to encourage many parties to copyright litigation to pursue a second bite of the cherry on appeal.
A second interesting feature to emerge from Designers Guild Limited v. Russell Williams (Textiles) Limited is the support which it provides for this article’s general thesis to the judiciary is alive en route for the dangers of allowing the ‘balance’ of copyright law to tilt too far within the direction of rights-owners. In emphasising that copyright protection does not extend to ‘ideas’, Morritt LJ referred explicitly near the undesirability of allowing a monopoly to spread too widely:
There is an obvious danger that if the net of copyright law protection is cast too wide it will serve to create monopolies in ideas. ... In that event the more limited purpose of the law of copyright, namely to protect the product of the skill and labour of the designer, would be exceeded....

2. Cantor Fitzgerald International v. Tradition (UK) Ltd
In Cantor Fitzgerald, Pumfrey J, has taken considerable steps towards resolving doubts about the application of principles of infringement to software copyright. The claimant in this case owned the copyright into the software designed for a complex bond-broking system. A number of the claimant’s employees left to join a rival business and were involved in creating bond-broking software for their new employer, Tradition. The claimant sued for, inter alia, infringement of copyright. Pumfrey J found that a number of lines of the claimant’s computer code had been reproduced and to the claim for infringement of copyright law was accordingly successful.
However, the finding of infringement is not the most notable feature of the judgement. Indeed, many of the allegations of infringement were admitted. Of greater interest are Pumfrey J’s efforts to apply principles of infringement within the context of software. In particular, he was concerned to establish what constitutes a ‘substantial part’ of the software work. In doing so, he warned of the dangers of making misleading analogies with other forms of literary work. It is ironic, then, to the most impressive feature of this judgement is its cogent application of perfectly orthodox copyright principles in a new context.
The claimant had argued that, because the omission of a very small part of a computer program could cause that program to fail, every small section of the code was a ‘substantial part’. Pumfrey J refuted this argument. He reiterated the importance of assessing how much of a creator’s labour and skill is reproduced in a defendant’s work. If the part of a copyright work reproduced represents only a small fraction of a creator’s labour and skill, it will not be a ‘substantial part’ of that work . This point may seem rather obvious but is often obscured in infringement cases where reference is made within the direction of the idea that a ‘substantial part’ need not be substantial in quantity but can be substantial in ‘quality’. This is only true into the sense that a relatively small part over which the work’s creator has exercised sufficient ‘labour and skill’ is ‘substantial’. It is not true in the sense that a small, but functionally important, part of the work is necessarily a ‘substantial’ part of that work. Pumfrey J has performed a valuable service in making this point so clearly in his judgement .

Defences Statutory and Common Law
Not every infringement of copyright law entitles a copyright owner to a legal remedy. In some circumstances, the user of a copyright work may be entitled to rely upon a defence. The CDPA contains a long list of ‘permitted acts’ . There are also certain residual common law defences. Both have a vital role in ensuring to the balance between the interests of copyright law owners and the public interest is correctly struck. Recently, the proper role of these limitations and exceptions towards the rights of a copyright owner has been the subject of significant international debate. By coincidence, it is also in this area of copyright law that some of the most significant domestic decisions have been made this year. Overall, they further indicate judicial willingness to promote the ‘broader public interest’.

Pro Sieben Media A.G. v. Carlton U.K. Television Ltd
In perhaps the most significant copyright decision of the last year, the Court of Appeal reversed Laddie J on the interpretation of the ‘fair dealing’ provisions contained in s. 30 CDPA. The claimant, a German television company, produced a programme incorporating an interview with Mandy Allwood who was pregnant with eight live embryos. It had paid Ms Allwood a substantial sum for the interview. The defendants broadcast a programme entitled ‘Selling Babies’ that aimed to expose the activities of the public relations industry in selling the stories of ordinary people involved in newsworthy stories. It featured a clip from the claimant’s interview with Ms Allwood. The claimant sued for infringement of copyright during the film and broadcast of the interview. The defendant relied upon the defences of fair dealing for the purpose of review or criticism and fair dealing for the purpose of reporting current events. At first instance, Laddie J rejected the defendant’s arguments because its programme had not, in his opinion, been produced for the purposes of ‘criticism or review’ or ‘reporting current events’ and because the defendant had not provided the ‘sufficient acknowledgement’ required by s. 30

Remedies for Copyright Infringement
The high level of protection accorded to intellectual property rights is reflected within the strength of remedies and penalties available for copyright infringement. A defendant found liable for infringement of copyright law may not only face a straightforward claim for damages or an injunction. He or she may also be subject to an account of profits, to punitive ‘additional damages’ or to criminal proceedings. In the period covered by this review, the Court of Appeal, in Microsoft Corporation v. Plato Technology Ltd, has approved a judicial practice of limiting the grant of a final injunction in copyright proceedings and Ferris J., in Springsteen, has made questionable use of the power to award ‘additional damages’ for infringement of copyright .
Microsoft Corporation v. Plato Technology Ltd
Microsoft v. Plato perhaps represents the most striking recent example of judicial concern to prevent copyright owners abusing their rights. In this case, the defendant was sued for infringement of copyright law after supplying a small amount of counterfeit Microsoft software to enquiry agents acting on behalf of Microsoft. The software had been supplied on the way to the defendant by a third party. On an application for summary judgement, Alan Seinfeld Q.C., found that Microsoft was entitled to summary judgement for infringement of copyright law but characterised the defendant’s infringement as ‘relatively minor and unintended’ . He found no evidence to suggest with the intention of the defendant had any intention of repeating the infringement.
Accordingly, he refused to grant the ‘usual’ wide-ranging injunction against future infringement and accepted the defendant’s undertaking not to carry out a variety of specified acts in relation to items which it knew or ought upon reasonable enquiry to have known were infringing products.
The Deputy Judge based his grant of such limited relief upon the defendant’s status as an ‘honest trader’ whom it would be unfair to presume likely to infringe again. He found that dishonesty could not be imputed near the defendant simply because he had failed to investigate further whether or not the software in question was counterfeit. The only way in which he could have established this conclusively was by taking the software out of its wrapper and by having detailed knowledge of the claimant’s anti-counterfeit measures. Microsoft appealed against the failure to award it the ‘usual’ wide-ranging final prohibitory injunction following summary judgement.
Nourse LJ, found to the Deputy Judge had not exceeded his discretion in refusing to award a wider injunction. There was, he stated, no inflexible rule of entitlement as of right to an injunction within the usual wide form. The judge’s findings with the purpose of the defendant had been honest and had no intention to infringe further were quite proper. In an ‘exceptional’ case such as this, the award of a narrower form of injunction was well within the court’s discretion. The Court of Appeal also gave tacit approval inside the direction of the Deputy Judge’s concern that an injunction into the terms sought by Microsoft would be oppressive. He had been unwilling to accept Microsoft’s argument that, if the defendant were to show an intention to continue to purchase Microsoft software from unauthorised dealers, it would risk purchasing counterfeit software and would therefore be indicating an intention to continue infringement. He noted that an “injunction to restrain the defendant from dealing in Microsoft products purchased otherwise than from an authorised distributor... would plainly be an unreasonable restraint of trade” .
However, on one point, the judgement of the Court of Appeal seems unduly timid. Nourse LJ stated that a narrower form of injunction may be appropriate in ‘exceptional’ circumstances. It is clear that he did not wish to appear to be laying down a precedent in this case and it is perhaps in this context that he was keen to stress the ‘exceptional’ nature of this case. With respect, however, it is difficult to see how this case can be regarded as ‘exceptional’ in an area of law where strict liability is so significant. If such an injunction is in the limits of judicial discretion in this case, it seems very likely that similar orders will be appropriate in a large number of other such ‘exceptional’ cases.
Springsteen v. Flute International and others
This case, in which two sets of proceedings were consolidated, concerned the ‘back catalogue’ of the popular musician, Bruce Springsteen. Various compilations of early works were released without permission. These ‘boot-leg’ compilations were issued, or imported, by two companies, Flute International Limited and Masquerade Music Limited. The claimant copyright owner faced difficulty in tracing back his title to the works. Ferris J, refusing to be bound by a strict application of the ‘best evidence’ rule, accepted Springsteen’s ownership of the copyright interests in question. He also found with the aim of the guiding minds behind Flute International Limited and Masquerade Music Limited was personally liable for the infringements committed in the name of those companies .
However, the decision to award statutory ‘additional damages’ under section 97 CDPA against T, the individual who controlled Flute International Ltd, is also noteworthy. Under section 97, the court has the power to award additional damages, having regard to all the circumstances and, in particular, ‘the "flagrancy of the infringement" and "any benefit accruing to the defendant by reason of the infringement"‘ . T had, ultimately, received no benefit from the infringements. However, his conduct was, according to Ferris J ‘quite seriously flagrant’. He had engaged in a calculated attempt to ‘cash in’ on the market for Springsteen’s work and had been reckless as to whether or not he infringed. It was also considered relevant that T had acted improperly towards his own business associates. While reserving final calculation of additional damages to an inquiry following judgement, Ferris J. stated to the sum awarded ought to be into the region of £1 per CD produced but not sold and £5 per CD produced and sold.
The question of whether a claimant will be entitled to ‘additional damages’ and an account of profits has been the subject of considerable recent judicial scrutiny.However, to date, very little attention has been directed to establishing the true function of such damages and the circumstances in which a claimant is entitled to an award . The conduct of T was undoubtedly reckless and improper. Nevertheless, the award of additional damages in this case highlights problems with the power to award such damages. First, it is by no means clear how ‘flagrancy’ is to be assessed. Here, the ‘calculating’ attitude of the defendant was significant. However, the issue of copyright ownership in this case was by no means clear-cut. The question of whether or not the claimant was entitled to copyright in the songs occupied many hours of the court’s time. In circumstances where the ownership was so uncertain, it seems incorrect to regard T as having blatantly flouted the claimant’s copyright interest. Indeed, it is by no means clear to whom the defendant’s ‘flagrant’ conduct has to be directed under this provision . In this case, the business associates to whom T was found to have behaved improperly were themselves within the process of producing infringing copies of Springsteen’s work.
There is a severe need for these issues of the authorship to be addressed. If an award of additional damages is not made on the basis of principle, it is little more than a punishment for ‘undeserving’ defendants. The dangers are underlined in Springsteen by the size of the award which the judge predicted. The principles of ‘rough justice’ upon which the calculation of these figures was made has been justly criticised by Coulthard . He has noted to the figure of £5 per copy of each CD produced and sold is likely to be substantially greater than the profit figure on those CDs. Such decisions lead one to question the very existence of such a statutory power. Why should ‘flagrant’ copyright infringement be subject to particular sanction when infringements of other intellectual property rights, or other tortious acts, are not?

Conclusion
The above review has had two aims. It has attempted to set out developments in UK copyright law over the last 12 months. It has also tried to set these developments in the context of larger trends in this area of the law. In particular, it has noted a recent legislative expansion of the copyright monopoly and a corresponding judicial concern not to permit this development to swamp the public interest. It is not contended that all of the decisions noted support the review’s thesis. For example, the pronouncement of the Court of Appeal in AEI Rediffusion Music Ltd v. Phonographic Performances Ltd and of Ferris J in Springsteen have been criticised as failing to take sufficient account of the need to interpret monopolistic powers strictly. However, judicial awareness of the need to limit the copyright monopoly is readily apparent within the majority of the reviewed decisions.
The significance of judicial resistance to an undesirable expansion of the copyright monopoly is unlikely to diminish in the first years of the new millenium. The legislative calm of the past year is likely to be disturbed by a rapidly advancing storm. Action will need to be taken to implement the European Directive on the legal protection of designs . While predominantly concerned with registered designs, this will also have an impact upon copyright law. Under Article 17 of the Directive, provisions seeking to restrict concurrent protection of works as registered designs and under copyright law will be prohibited. Section 52 of the CDPA, which reduces the term of artistic copyright to 25 years following commercial exploitation, is such a provision and will have to be repealed. In addition, the rights of performers will have to be enhanced in order for the UK to comply with the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty which requires ratifying states to provide them with moral rights .
However, there is a development of even greater significance on the horizon. The European Directive on Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society is likely to be adopted within the near future and is set to disturb copyright law in this jurisdiction considerably. Some of the Directive’s provisions are necessary developments in response to new forms of communication technology and towards the WIPO Copyright Treaty. For example, the extension of the right to control public performances to include “the making available to the public of ... works in such a way that members of the public may access them from a place and at a time individually chosen by them” . However, elsewhere the Directive threatens dramatic disruption of the balance between right-owners and users. Article 5 provides an exhaustive list of situations in which a member state may provide for exceptions or limitations to copyright protection. Many of the statutory ‘permitted acts’ inside the CDPA are not covered by any of the listed situations. The careful balancing exercise attempted during the CDPA will be entirely undone. Judicial ingenuity will have to be pushed to new limits if the public interest in access to copyright works is not to be hugely diminished.
References
J. Barlow, ‘A framework for rethinking patents and copyrights in the Digital Age (everything you know about intellectual property is wrong)’, Wired 2.03, March 1994, at 84.
Wagamama Ltd v. City Centre Restaurants plc [1995] F.S.R. 713 and Zino Davidoff v. A & G Imports Ltd [1999] 2 C.M.L.R. 1056.
Sir H Laddie, op. cit., note 7, and Sir R Jacob ‘Industrial Property Industry’s Enemy?’, [1997] I.P.Q. 3.
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, (‘CDPA’), s. 1.
Taverner Rutledge v. Specters [1959] R.P.C. 355.
Elanco Products Ltd v. Mandops (Agrochemical Specialists) Ltd [1980] R.P.C. 213 (C.A.).
M Brown ‘The UK Protection of Films: Issues raised by the case of Norowzian v. Arks Ltd’, [1999] Ent. L.R. 323.
Norowzian v. Arks Ltd (No. 2) [1999] F.S.R. 79 at. 86. According to CDPA, s. 3(2)):
[1989] R.P.C. 700.
[1999] F.S.R. 79 at p 87.
Stuart v. Barrett [1999] E.M.L.R. 589, Godfrey v. Lees [1995] E.M.L.R. 307, Fylde Microsystems Ltd v. Key Radio Systems Ltd [1998] F.S.R. 449, Robin Ray v. Classic F.M. plc, [1998] F.S.R. 622, Cala Homes (South) Ltd v. Alfred
McAlpine Homes East Ltd [1995] F.S.R. 818.
[1999] EMLR. 589.
[1998] FSR. 449.
[1999] EMLR 589 at p 643
CDPA, s. 16.
Unreported, All England Direct transcript.
Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division. See [1998] F.S.R. 803.
P.C.R. Ltd v. Dow Jones Telerate Ltd [1998] F.S.R. 170 and Hyde Park Residences Ltd v. Yelland [1999] All E.R. (D) 272.,
Unreported, All England Direct transcript, The Independent, 5 May 1999.
Macmillan v. Cooper (1924) 40 T.L.R. 186 (P.C.), Ladbroke v. William Hill (Football) Ltd [1964] 1 All E.R. 465 (H.L.) and Warwick Film Productions Ltd v. Eisinger [1969] 1 Ch. 508.
[1999] 1 W.L.R. 605. For further discussion, see D Bradshaw, ‘Copyright, fair dealing and the Mandy Allwood case’, [1999] Ent. L.R. 125.
A sufficient acknowledgement’ is ‘an acknowledgement identifying the work in question by its title or other description, and identifying the author ...’ (CDPA, s. 178).
P.C.R. Ltd v. Dow Jones Telerate Ltd [1998] F.S.R. 170 and Hyde Park Residences Ltd v. Yelland [1999] All E.R. (D) 272.
The Software Directive (91/250) was implemented by means of the Copyright (Computer Programs) regulations 1992.
Redrow Homes Ltd v. Bett Brothers plc. [1998] 2 W.L.R. 198 (H.L.).
A Coulthard ‘ZYX Music GmbH v. King, [1995]’, Journal of Business Law 1995, p 617.
A Coulthard ‘Springsteen v. Flute International Ltd.’, [1999] Communications Law 108.
Patent Office’s Consultation Paper on ‘Moral rights for performers’, January 1999.
Amended Proposal for a Directive on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the Information Society, COM (1999) 250 final.

Psychobiological Approach Understanding Human Behaviour

Introduction
This paper examines the psychobiological approach pertaining to conduct disorder (CD) of human behaviour, with particular emphasis on how such information can increase our understanding of youths representing the under socialized aggressive subtype of CD. Although much of the information is preliminary and fraught with methodological shortcomings, literature from the neuro anatomical, biochemical, psycho physiological and pharmacological arenas is reviewed. The theoretical framework offered by Gray, Quay's application of this model to CD, and the empirical strategies used to evaluate assumptions of bio-behavioural systems are outlined.
The utility of considering psycho biologically based behavioural propensities when developing a treatment plan is discussed. A growing body of research has provided conceptual advances in our understanding of the relationship between clinical diagnostic categories or behavioural dimensions and various indices of psychobiological functioning. Included in this focus on the biological underpinnings of deviations in behavioural propensities is the under socialized aggressive subtype of conduct disorder (UACD). This paper will outline the biological correlates of this syndrome in which instrumental Cosmides and J. Tooby, 2000, 25-147) no defensive or proactive) aggression plays a major role, focusing on the evidence available from the biochemical, psycho physiological, neuro anatomical, and neuro behavioural study.
Support for the presence of the under socialized aggressive syndrome comes from the consistency with which it has been isolated in multivariate studies over the past several decades (Quay, 1986, 63-98). Characteristics of UACD include serious and persistent physical aggression, deception, violation of property rights and societal norms, disturbed interpersonal relationships, and school adjustment problems (Kazdin, 1987a; Quay, 1986). The DSM III-R (American Psychiatric Association, 1987) solitary type is roughly akin to the empirically derived UACD, although the former lacks somewhat in operational criteria used to describe its distinctiveness from other DSM III-R subtypes (e.g., group and undifferentiated). Researchers continue to debate the utility of investigating individual differences in aggressive versus dichotomous diagnostic categories (Plomin, Nitz, & Rowe, 1990).
In addition, narrowly defined areas of behaviour (narrow-band syndromes) may provide a better basis for detecting specific etiologist and prescribing specific treatments compared to focusing on the global distinction between broad-band under controlled and over controlled behaviour (Darwin, 1872, 36-199).
Although an assumption that biological differences could underlie differences in behaviour may suggest a view of biological determinism, in no way should the evidence be construed as such. Behaviour genetic researchers have asserted and provided evidence that psychopathology is both polygenic and "poly environmental" (Ekman, 1994, 268-87)
Anything short of adopting the concept of genotype-environment interaction and correlation likely disregards the complexity of the task at hand. Patterson's (1982) work reflects the genotype-environment interaction orientation, in that environmental factors (permissive or excessively punitive parents) may have different effects on individuals of different genotypes (aggressive children). Patterson's work also implicates a causal relationship between parental behaviours and subsequent child aggression. The genotype-environment correlation represents the notion that children with a genetic predisposition toward aggressiveness may seek out situations that reinforce this behaviour.In this context, empirical evidence appears to support a bio psycho social model of investigation and explanation.

Psychobiology of Conduct Human Behaviour Disorder
The current body on the biological basis of CD includes perspectives representing neuro anatomy, neurochemistry, psychophysiology, pharmacology, and behavioural paradigms that may reflect systems of neuropsychological functioning. Much of the evidence is preliminary, and should not be viewed as offering firm conclusions. Instead, it has provided a framework in which to pursue more methodologically refined investigations. A review of this literature is offered to increase the awareness of the biological perspective and to stimulate further research (Darwin, 1872, 36-199).
The neuro anatomical perspective attempts to delineate the location of the brain areas which are part of the systems involved in behaviours associated with CD. The neuro chemical approach focuses on the role of neurotransmitters that play a functional role in the neuronal circuitry underlying CD. Psycho physiological measures provide an index of autonomic nervous system functioning, which is responsible for the control of involuntary bodily functions. Pharmacological studies may provide additional information on the underlying biological systems involved in CD and their responsively to modification. Behavioural studies which document an individual's cognitive, learning, motivational, and attention style e.g., in the context of response characteristics under certain experimental paradigms which may reflect response "styles" to environmental situations) may provide insight into the functioning of certain biological subsystems (Izard, 1992, 561-565).

Biochemical Studies
Neurotransmitters and neuro hormones have long been implicated in the regulation of several behavioural systems that in turn regulate the interaction of the organism with its external environment. Although many more neurotransmitters are known to exist, nore pinephrine (NE) and serotonin (5HT) have been implicated most often in the CD literature. Neuro hormones such as cortisol and testosterone also have been implicated in aggressive behaviour. Details of neuro chemical functioning in the context of various psychobiological models of personality and psychopathological disorders in children are provided by McBurnett (1992, 63).
Neurotransmitters (NTs) play a key role in transmitting information across cells, and can be classified as either excitatory (causing nerve cells to "fire") or inhibitory (reducing the responsively of nerve cells to incoming stimulation). The activity of a NT itself is regulated in many ways, and although the location of the cell bodies for NT systems has been identified, the axons from the cell bodies project across and throughout the brain. Furthermore, a neuron using one NT connects with neurons using other NTs, resulting in a direct interaction among the noradrenergic, dopaminergic, and serotonergic systems. The balance among the three systems likely plays an important role in how behaviour is regulated and expressed (Lazarus, 1991, 819-834). It is important to note that existing technology does not allow for a direct measure of NT activity. Body fluids (LeDoux, 1995, 45-189) cerebrospinal fluid or CSF, blood plasma, urine), enzymes (Schachter and Singer, 1962, 379-399) chemical substances that can induce changes in NTs without being changed themselves), platelets, drug probes which stimulate receptors for certain NTs, and brain imaging techniques all provide an indirect measure of NTs and their metabolites. Each technique poses particular challenges, advantages, and drawbacks.

Psycho physiological Studies
Involuntary bodily functions are under the regulation of the autonomic nervous system (ANS), which is divided into the sympathetic and parasympathetic system. Stimulation of the sympathetic portion typically produces, among other things, a rise in blood pressure, acceleration of the heart, and changes in the electrical conductance of the skin. These peripheral indices of sympathetic nervous system activity are usually measured at rest and in response to stimuli with varying evocative properties.
With regard to heart rate, several studies have found that youths with CD exhibit lower resting levels compared to controls and subjects without CD. Prospective longitudinal studies also have found that low heart rate was predictive of later aggressive criminal behaviour and criminal convictions (Scherer, 2003, 563-571).
Several studies have found lower responsively to stimuli as measured by skin conductance changes in variously defined youths with CD compared to controls, although measures of resting levels have yielded less consistent results. Garralda, Connell, and Taylor (1991, 14-29) found that children with CD showed increased reactivity, relative to emotional disorder and control group, when they were instructed to imagine pleasant situations. They also showed decreased responding to neutral but high intensity stimulation and to withdrawal of stimulation in silence periods.
Studies measuring electrical brain activity in response to stimulus events (event-related potentials, or ERPs) have suggested that certain components of the typical wave pattern may differ in children with conduct problems. These components are expressed in direction, amplitude, and latency of the electrical response following the stimulus event. Research comparing adolescents with and without CD have shown the former to exhibit higher P300 amplitudes to warning signals (Zajonc, 1985, 15-21) and a longer latency of N2 evoked peaks (Zajonc, 1985, 15-21). Components of the ERP may be predictive of adult criminality (Scherer, 2003, 563-571) although developmental factors still need to be considered.
Most of the above evidence suggests that anomalies in the modulation of biological arousal mechanisms may play a role in the expression of childhood psychopathology (Garralda et al., 1991). Further research with children representing various developmental levels and behavioural and emotional disorders is clearly needed to specify this relationship.

Behavioural Studies
The empirical literature reviewed so far, although not without its methodological limitations, suggests there may be a correspondence between aggressive behaviour characterizing the youth with CD and various neurophysiologic indices. Such a model would be strengthened by convergent evidence for these individuals exhibiting differences in learning and performance patterns that relate back to underlying biological systems. Theoretical and empirical work presented by Gray (1982, 1987) have been very influential in developing a line of research exploring the relationship between emotions, behaviour and performance within the context of instrumental learning paradigms. Since space prohibits a detailed description of Gray's model, the reader is referred to a well-articulated review by McBurnett (1992).
Stemming from a series of experimental findings, Gray has proposed a modification in Eysenck's (1967) personality theory. Gray (1987) has emphasized the utility of viewing personality dimensions in terms of individual differences in conditionality and sensitivity to punishment versus reward. This has led to the proposal that behaviour is regulated primarily by two different but interacting conceptual brain systems: the behavioural inhibition system (BIS) and the behavioural activation (or reward) system (BAS).
The BIS is excited by signals of impending punishment, signals recently associated with the failure of a formerly expected reward to appear (Cannon, 1927, 10-124)
frustrative non reward), or arousing novel stimuli. Functionally, the BIS responds with outputs that inhibit ongoing behaviour, but also increases arousal, attention, and information processing of the stimuli. The resulting emotion is anxiety and frustration. Presumably, an individual with chronically hyper reactive BIS, relative to the BAS, would exhibit symptoms of anxiety, whereas an individual with a relative hypo reactive BIS would be predicted to show a marked lack of anticipatory anxiety and deficiencies in passive avoidance learning (Cosmides and J. Tooby, 2000, 25-147) i.e., reinforcement contingent upon not responding). In support of this notion, Hare (1970, 1978) has documented deficiencies in passive avoidance among "primary psychopaths" or individuals considered to exhibit antisocial personality disorder under the current diagnostic schema. Cleckley (1976) characterized these individuals as showing a marked incapacity for anxiety. Gray suggests that the anatomical locus of the BIS is in the septo-hippocampal system with neural circuits through the noradrenergic fibres of the locus coeruleus and the serotonergic fibres of the rapine nucleus.
Interacting with the BIS, the BAS mediates the learning and performance of active responses to either gain a reward (approach) or avoid an impending punishment (escape or active avoidance). Dopamine is considered to play a significant role, and the core anatomical components are suggested to be the medial forebrain bundle, lateral hypothalamus, and lateral septum.
Gray proposes, therefore, that individual differences in personality are jointly determined by the sensitivities of the two above systems. Shaping an individual's behaviour may be predicted by the conditions of reinforcement to which they are most sensitive, based on the relative functioning of the BIS and BAS. That is, will available reward or signals of punishment have a dominant influence over one's behaviour? A more prescriptive approach to treatment planning may evolve out of knowledge regarding the relative sensitivities of these two bio behavioural systems. A decision to reward non prohibited behaviour or punish prohibited behaviour may rest largely upon what is known about an individual's psycho biologically based behavioural propensities (Quay, 1987, 66-174).
A series of empirical studies have investigated Gray's framework in the context of psychopathological disorders in children and adolescents. Based on Gray's work, Quay (1988a, 1988b, 1988c) proposed that CD involves a persistently overactive reward system (BAS) that predominates over the BIS. That is, these children exhibit persistent reward-dominant behaviour. Quay also has proposed that an underactive BIS characterizes children with attention deficits, whereas the BIS would predominate over the BAS in anxious-withdrawn children. Thus, rather than working in tandem, one system may predominate across situations, resulting in less behavioural flexibility, so to speak.
Newman and his colleagues have focused on a model of "dis inhibitory" psychopathology, suggesting that under conditions that pit the probability of reward against the probability of punishment, psychopaths and extraverts show a greater tendency to respond to cues of reward (Newman, Patterson & Kosson, 1987, 145-149).
A computerized card-playing task was used consisting of 100 trials (cards) in which subjects chose either to see the next card or to stop playing. In the preprogrammed sequence, the probability of the next card being a winning card dropped from 90% to 0% per 10-card block. Money was immediately given or taken away from subjects depending upon whether the card "uncovered" was designated a "winner" or "loser." The dependent measure on this task was number of cards played. Preservative responding results in fewer earnings, due to the fact that the probability of winning decreases as the game is played.
The delay task operationally a differential reinforcement for low-rate responding (DRL) paradigm. Purported to examine disinhibition, the delay task provides dependent measures of the efficiency with which subjects respond to the delay requirements. Results provided strong support for the notion that children with CD are overly sensitive to reward and fail to inhibit responding in mixed incentive conditions. As a group, subjects with CD played more cards and lost more money than the group without CD. These differences emerged even after co varying for RBPC ratings of attention problems. Mixed results were obtained on the delay task, although subjects with CD were significantly less efficient during the last segment of the task (LeDoux, 1995, 45-189).
Results offered by Daugherty and Quay (1991) provide additional support for the hypothesis of preservative responding for reward in conduct disorder. In this study, public school children in Grades 3 through 6 were screened using the RBPC. Four groups were identified, as defined by scores on the relevant scale CD, ADD, CD/ADDH, AW (anxious-withdrawn), and a normal control group. Tasks included a modified version of the card-playing task deemed more appropriate for younger children (Cosmides and J. Tooby, 2000, 25-147) referred to as the door-opening task), and the Gordon delay task. Consistent with Quay's hypothesis, subjects with a CD or CD/ADDH behaviour pattern (Cosmides and J. Tooby, 2000, 25-147) although not necessarily considered clinically significant) responded preservative for reward to a maladaptive degree (Scherer, 2003, 563-571) i.e., they lost rewards already won). The anxious-withdrawn subjects, as a group, chose to stop the task prior to the optimal interval; that is, they stopped too soon and did not receive as much money as they could have. No group differences were found on the delay task.
Daugherty, Quay, and Ramos (1991) found a similarly strong tendency for the group with CD to respond preservative on the door opening task, although group differences among subjects classified as RBPC-defined CD/ADDH, ADD, AW, and normal controls did not emerge. A unique feature of this study was the measurement of spontaneous eye-blinks during a 5-minute interview. Karson (1983) has suggested that eye-blink rate is a behavioural measure of central dopaminergic activity, and thus may provide a "window" into BAS activity. Although no group differences were found, eye-blinks were marginally related to CD subscale scores on the RBPC.
Kalantari, Yule, and Gardner (1990) have extended the findings of preservative responding to a small sample of preschool children in Iran. All 6 children rated by their teachers as having persistent behaviour problems played significantly more cards than the 6 children in the normal control group. In fact, all behaviour-disordered children played all cards and therefore lost all candy rewards, compared to only 2 normal control children.
Passive avoidance deficits have been documented among disinhibited individuals, in that they are deficient in learning to inhibit goal-directed behaviour in the presence of cues of reward. Scerbo et al. (1990) applied this paradigm to juvenile delinquents classified as psychopaths (CD) or non psycho paths. Specifically, subjects were instructed to respond to items designated as positive discriminative stimuli and to withhold responding to negative stimuli. Responses to negative items were considered passive avoidance (or commission) errors and resulted in loss of rewards. Failure to respond to positive stimuli were considered omission errors, but produced no consequences, as did withholding responses to negative stimuli.
The paradigm used by Scerbo et al. (1990) did not include a reward-only or punishment-only condition. The psychopathic or CD group made significantly more responses to the positive stimuli (Borod, 2000, 63-128) fewer errors of omission) than the non psychopathic group. The two groups did not differ on the number of incorrect responses to negative stimuli (commissions). Results were interpreted in the context of hyper responsively to rewards under conditions of mixed incentives in psychopathic-like adolescents.
Studies investigating the effects of coexisting psychiatric disorders have shed light on Gray's (1987) two-factor model, that antisocial behaviour is the product of both excessive reward-seeking behaviour and insufficient inhibition. Walker et al. (1991) formed four groups of clinic-referred boys with and without conduct disorder and anxiety disorder. As predicted by Gray's model, boys with CD and comorbid anxiety exhibited less social impairments (fewer school suspensions, fewer police contacts, fewer "fight most" and "meanest" peer nominations) than boys with CD alone. Additional research with these comorbid populations using similar paradigms described in previous sections of this paper would be very fruitful.

Conclusions
School personnel are frequently among the first individuals to face the challenges posed by students exhibiting chronic and severe conduct problems, of which aggression is among the most salient and disruptive symptom. Educators, counsellors, and school psychologists, in conjunction with parents and other health professionals, are often faced with decisions regarding how best to manage children and adolescents with CD in the school setting. A likely role of the school psychologist is to formally evaluate students referred for disruptive behaviours and to recommend/develop intervention strategies. Given the complexity of the problems associated with CD, it would seem prudent for the school psychologist to be aware of information pertaining to biological correlates of CD, so that a well-integrated intervention plan could be developed. Knowledge of the biological basis of CD also may assist in the development of treatment plans more consistent with what is known about how youths with CD respond to their environment.
Patterns of behaviour are mediated by various neuro physiological mechanisms, regardless of the psychosocial origin of those patterns. This in no way minimizes the importance of interventions focusing on psychosocial factors, since they are integrally related to each other. However, it emphasizes the need to consider the body of literature pertaining to neuro anatomical, neuro chemical, psycho physiological, pharmacological, and neuro behavioural research as it relates to the symptoms and syndrome of CD. For example, how might an individual's and attention style is determined by neuro physiological processes? How might certain response styles in a controlled laboratory setting provide some insight into the functioning of certain biological systems? How might the above information be used to develop an intervention program specific to an individual's neuro physiological or neuro behavioural profile?
Considerable interest in these and related questions is reflected in a growing body of literature that has accumulated over the past decade. Methodological issues will need to be addressed by researchers investigating the etiology and maintenance of CD. Specific issues, among others, include how antisocial behaviour is defined (e.g., specific behaviours, narrow-band versus broad-band, subtypes, etc.); the effect of coexisting disorders (e.g., ADHD, anxiety, etc.) on an individual's functioning; the need to control for cognitive and demographic characteristics; the delineation of factors that may be consequences of behaviour problems rather than causes of them; and the indirect or peripheral measures of neuro physiological indices. In light of the limitations represented in the literature, no firm conclusions can be drawn about the psychobiology of CD.
Even if firm conclusions could be drawn, a biologically deterministic view-point should be vigorously discouraged. Delineation of biological markers of CD is likely to have extreme social implications and lead to many potential abuses of such information by those with sociopolitical agendas. Markers of CD should not be equated to markers for criminal behaviour, since most crime is not committed by individuals with CD or a history of CD (Damasio, 1994, 1102-5) Furthermore assert that "Identifying an individual as having high biological risk for antisocial conduct should never involve deprivation of opportunities or rights, but should involve enhancement of the opportunities to become successful, prosocial, and fully franchised members of society" (Scherer, 2003, 563-571).
With the above caveats in mind, the present literature has suggested many psychobiological characteristics of children and adolescents with CD. Measures of frontal-lobe functions have occasionally differentiated between youths with and without CD. Youths with CD have shown reduced ear asymmetry on a dichotic listening task, possibly suggesting a reduced role of language in mediating and regulating behaviour which may reflect left hemispheric functioning. Neurochemical studies, although frequently relying on peripheral measures, have strongly implicated the association between serotonergic and noradrenergic system functioning and aggressive/antisocial behaviour. The neuro hormones cortisol and testosterone also have been linked to CD. Several studies regarding sympathetic nervous system functioning have found that youths with CD, compared to youths without CD, exhibit lower heart rate levels, different patterns of stimulus responsively as measured by skin conductance, and different patterns of electrical brain activity in response to stimulus events.
Pharmacological studies have implicated potential drug therapies for youths with CD, although the lack of controlled studies and the nonspecific nature of the drug activity make interpretation difficult. Stemming largely from Gray's conceptual model of the nervous system and Quay's application of this model to child psychopathology, a body of literature has identified differences in conditionality and sensitivity to punishment and reward among youths with CD. Such differences based on the interaction between what is referred to as the behavioural inhibition and activation systems? Clearly suggest hypersensitivity of the youth with CD to reward and failure to inhibit responding in mixed incentive conditions i.e., cues for reward and punishment). Preliminary research using different groups co morbid for CD and anxiety have supported the notion that antisocial behaviour is the product of both excessive reward-seeking behaviour and insufficient inhibition. This behavioural line of research which focuses on instrumental learning characteristics and converges with neurophysiologic indices has clear treatment implications applicable to school settings. Shaping an individual's behaviour may be predicted by the conditions of reinforcement to which they are most sensitive, based on the relative functioning of two interacting bio behavioural systems and the behavioural propensities these systems modulate.

References
Borod, J.C. (Ed.), (2000) The Neuropsychology of Emotion, Oxford University Press, 63-128
Cannon, W. B. (1927) The James-Lange theory of emotion: A critical examination and an alternative theory. American Journal of Psychology; 39:10-124.
Cosmides, L. and J. Tooby (2000), ‘Evolutionary psychology and the emotions’, in Handbook of Emotions 2nd ed., Lewis, M. and J. M. Haviland-Jones Eds., (New York: Guilford).
Damasio H., Grabowski T,. Frank R., Galaburda AM., Damasio AR. (1994) The return of Phineas Gage: clues about the brain from the skull of a famous patient. Science. 264(5162):1102-5,
Darwin, C. (1872) The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, London: Murray
Dutton, D. G. and Aron, A. P. (1974) Some evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 510-517
Ekman, P. (1994). Strong evidence for universals in facial expressions. Psychological Bulletin. 115: 268-87

Izard, C. (1992). Basic Emotions, Relations Among Emotions, and Emotion-Cognition Relations. Psychological Review 99(3) 561- 565
Lazarus, R. (1991). Progress on a Cognitive-Motivational- Relational Theory of Emotion. American Psychologist 46(8) 819-834
LeDoux, J. (1995). In search of an emotional system in the brain: Leaping from fear to emotion to consciousness. In The cognitive neurosciences, M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Schachter, S. and Singer, J. E. (1962) Cognitive, social and physiological determinants of emotional states, Psychological Review, 69, 379-399
Scherer, K R. (2003). Introduction: Cognitive components of emotion. In R. J. Davidson, H. Goldsmith, K. R. Scherer (Eds.). Handbook of the Affective Sciences (pp. 563-571). New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zajonc, R. B., (1985) Emotion and Facial Efference: A Theory Reclaimed, Science, 228, 15-21.

Gray, J. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septohippocampal system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Quay, H. C. (1986). Conduct disorders. In H. C. Quay & J. S. Werry (Eds.), Psychopathological disorders of childhood (3rd ed, pp. 35-72). New York: Wiley.
Kazdin, A. E. (1987a). Conduct disorders in childhood and adolescence. Newbury Park, CA. Sage.
Kazdin, A. E. (1987b). Treatment of antisocial behavior in children: Current status and future directions. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 187-203.
Plomin, R., Nitz, K., & Rowe, D. C. (1990). Behavior genetics and aggressive behavior in childhood. In M. Lewis & S. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of develop mental psychopathology (pp. 119-133). New York: Plenum.
Patterson, G. R. (1982). Coercive family process. Eugene, OR: Castalia Publications.
McBurnett, K. (1992). Psychobiological approaches to personality and their application to child psychopathology. In B. B. Lahey & A. E. Kazdin (Eds.) Advances in clinical child psychology (pp. 107-164). New York: Plenum.
Garralda, M. E., Connell, J., & Taylor, D. C. (1991). Psychophysiological anomalies in children with emotional and conduct disorders. Psychological Medicine, 21, 947-957.
Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
Hare, R. D. (1970). Psychopathy: Theory and research. New York: Wiley.
Hare, R. D. (1978). Electrodermal and cardiovascular correlates of psychopathy. In R. D. Hare & D. Schalling (Eds.), Psychopathic behavior: Approaches to research (pp. 107-143). New York: Wiley.
Cleckley, H. C. (1976). The mask of sanity. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
Gorenstein, E. E., & Newman, J. P. (1980). Disinhibitory psychopathology: A new perspective and a model for research. Psychological Review, 87, 301-315.
Daugherty, T. K., Quay, H. C., & Ramos, L. (1991). Response perseveration, inhibitory control, and central dopaminergic activity in childhood behavior disorders. Unpublished manuscript, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL.
Kalantari, M., Yule, W., & Gardner, F. (1990,Jan.). Oversensitivity to reward in preschool conduct disordered children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Research in Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, Costa Mesa, CA.
Scerbo, A. R., Raine, A., O'Brien, M., Chan, C., Rhee, C., & Smiley, N. (1990). Reward dominance in passive-avoidance learning in adolescent psychopaths. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 18, 451-463.