background. Here I find that the idea and the expression are substantially the same and
therefore there is infringement of the plaintiff’s copyright.
Fertility doll
The plaintiff presented a fertility doll which she painted on a seasonal card in 2002 Marked
Exhibit P.16 with her style of a black boundary and gold details and the bright background.
She compared it with the defendants card marked Exhibit P.17. I find the two are
significantly different the bottom of the plaintiff’s doll is straight while that of the defendant’s
is curved. There is therefore no infringement here.
Neighborhood
Next the plaintiff presented a blue seasonal card marked Exhibit P.18 illustrating a
neighborhood which had three adults and a child. She compared this with the defendant’s
card that had a blue canvass with two adults and a child marked Exhibit P19. Comparing the
two I find that the idea is the same but the expression is different. There is therefore no
infringement here.
Moran Pombe
The plaintiff also presented a seasonal card made in 2003 Marked Exhibit P.20 that shows
men drinking a local brew, she compared it with the defendant’s piece marked Exhibit P.21
that was on a piece of bark cloth that had one man drinking from the local straw, sitting on a
stool. I find the idea and expression in the defendant’s work to be different. There is
therefore no infringement here.
Karamajong Women
The plaintiff then presented a piece is a wall hanging Marked Exhibit P.22 with three
Karamajong women half dressed with many chain necklaces, golden bracelets on their legs
and arms, the hear rings and a black border. The plaintiff compared it with the defendant’s
wall hanging Marked Exhibit P. 23 which had two women dancing with hands on their heads
14