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

After five IP partners left the firm for White & Case, the IP market could yet see more laterals
The court plans to introduce a system for expert-led SEP mediation, intended to help parties come to an agreement within three sessions
Paul Chapman and Robert Lind, who are retiring from Marks & Clerk after 30-year careers, discuss workplace loyalty, client care, and why we should be optimistic but cautious about AI
Brantsandpatents is seeking to boost its expertise across key IP services in the Benelux region
Shwetasree Majumder, managing partner of Fidus Law Chambers, discusses fighting gender bias and why her firm is building a strong AI and tech expertise
Hady Khawand, founder of AÏP Genius, discusses creating an AI-powered IP platform, and why, with the law evolving faster than ever, adaptability is key
UK firm Shakespeare Martineau, which secured victory for the Triton shower brand at the Court of Appeal, explains how it navigated a tricky test regarding patent claim scopes
The firm’s managing partner said the city is an ‘exciting hub of ideas and innovation’
In our latest podcast, Deborah Hampton talks through her hopes for the year, INTA’s patent focus, London 2026, and her love of music
Tech leads at three IP service groups discuss why firms need to move away from off-the-shelf AI products and adopt custom solutions
Gift this article