Court backs database owner in live football data case

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Court backs database owner in live football data case

Football Dataco has won its latest battle with bookmakers over the protection of live data relating to English and Scottish football matches, with a judge describing the defendants’ activities as “commercial piracy”

The decision, given by the England & Wales Court of Appeal yesterday, is Football Dataco v Stan James and Sportradar.

Football Dataco, which was set up by the relevant football leagues, compiles a database called Football Live. It includes live data such as goalscorers, penalties and red cards for a wide range of football matches.

In the litigation, Football Dataco said that the database costs £600,000 a year to compile and it claimed to own a sui generis database right in it.

Sportradar provides statistics to third parties such as bookmakers which it calls Live Scores. This includes data on football matches which is extracted in part from Football Live.

The case raised a number of issues regarding jurisdiction, database protection, liability and defences. It was further complicated in that Sportradar changed its practice after the litigation was started, so as to include less data for the lower-division matches.

The jurisdiction questions were referred to the Court of Justice of the EU, which ruled last October that the UK courts have jurisdiction where an overseas party intends to target members of the UK public. Sportradar subsequently conceded that it has that intention as it sells data to Stan James, a bookmaker.

In the meantime, Mr Justice Floyd ruled on the substantive issues in the case last May. Both parties appealed aspects of the decision.

The Court of Appeal yesterday ruled in favour of Football Dataco, with Sir Robin Jacob writing the judgment.

He found that there is a sui generis database right in the Football Live database; that UK punters extract a substantial part of it when using a pop-up on the Stan James website; and that both Stan James and Sportradar are joint tortfeasors.

He also rejected the defendants’ arguments under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights as “hopeless” saying: “The plain fact is that Sportradar is extracting a substantial part of the Football Live data without paying and Stan James are paying not FDC but Sportradar for the data collected by FDC.”

Football Dataco was represented by barristers James Mellor QC and Lindsay Lane and law firm DLA Piper.

Stan James was represented by Geoffrey Hobbs QC, Philip Roberts and Olswang while Michael Silverleaf QC, Hugo Cuddigan and Bird & Bird acted for Sportradar.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A multijurisdictional claim filed by InterDigital and a new spin-off firm in Germany were also among the top talking points
Duarte Lima, MD of Spruson & Ferguson’s Asia practice, says practitioners must adapt to process changes within IP systems, as well as be mindful of the implications of tech on their practices
Practitioners say the UK Supreme Court’s decision could boost the attractiveness of the UK for AI companies
New awards, including US ‘Firm of the Year’ and Latin America ‘Firm to Watch’, are among more than 90 prizes that will recognise firms and practitioners
DWF helped client Dairy UK secure a major victory at the UK Supreme Court
Hepworth Browne led Emotional Perception AI to victory at the UK Supreme Court, which rejected a previous appellate decision that said an AI network was not patentable
James Hill, general counsel at Norwich City FC, reveals how he balances fan engagement with brand enforcement, and when he calls on IP firms for advice
In the second of a two-part article, Gabrielle Faure-André and Stéphanie Garçon at Santarelli unpick EPO, UPC and French case law to assess the importance of clinical development timelines in inventive step analyses
Public figures are turning to trademark protection to combat the threat of AI deepfakes and are monetising their brand through licensing deals, a trend that law firms are keen to capitalise on
News of Avanci Video signing its first video licence and a win for patent innovators in Australia were also among the top talking points
Gift this article