We set out a few issues that parties in a spatial computing technology universe will need to consider regarding intellectual property:

Protecting the digital world

Spatial computing developers may be able to rely on a range of intellectual property regimes to protect the digital world and immersive experiences that they have created. For example, the protection of software, graphical and musical works which form a virtual reality world will all be protected by copyright in the usual manner where such creations are original. There may however be some challenges in protecting aspects of virtual worlds which are computer-generated using generative AI tools, where there is no identifiable human author. While UK copyright legislation recognises that copyright can exist in computer-generated works made without a human author (see our article here for more detail), the UK Intellectual Property Office is currently consulting on the efficacy of this aspect of the law and has recognised that there is uncertainty on how it might operate in practice. Developers should also consider whether their spatial technology platform is only experienced by users, or whether users will be able to create and modify works in the virtual reality environment. Where users may be creating content within the platform the ownership of any resulting copyright protected works should be addressed in the developer’s terms of service.

Developers may also be able to obtain design protection for a range of visual aspects of their augmented or virtual worlds, including graphical user interfaces, characters, icons and virtual spaces. One potential challenge to design protection is the uncertainty whether digital designs are registerable in the UK when they are not embodied in a physical article or product. The recent 2024 EU Designs reform addressed this issue to reform the definition of ‘product’ in EU designs law to explicitly include non-physical items, making it clear that digital only designs can be protected within the EU. The UK Intellectual Property Office has previously indicated that it was reviewing the EU reforms with interest and may look to similarly modernise the UK’s design law framework in the coming years.  

Protection of avatars

Users in metaverse environments are often depicted to others as ‘avatars’, a graphical representation of the user. The rapid development of AI tools is permitting these avatars to more closely resemble their real-world counterparts and the issue of control over digital replicas has been raised for discussion by the UK Government in its December consultation into copyright and AI. Concerns have also been raised about the extent to which unauthorised digital replicas could be made which imitate other individuals, with the recent US Copyright Office report into such digital replicas recommending the establishment of a right to protect individuals from the distribution of unauthorised digital replicas. 

Pending the development of specific legislative protection for avatars, those whose likeness has been replicated may be able to rely on other areas of law such as passing off or defamation to exercise some degree of control over unauthorised digital replicas.  

Interacting with the digital world

The move away from traditional computing interfaces such as keyboards or touchscreens to headsets or augmented reality glasses has led to a range of innovations in how users interact with these technologies –including voice recognition and gesture controls. 

Patent protection may be available for new and inventive ways of controlling spatial technology devices. For example, when introducing the Vision Pro mixed reality headset, Apple obtained patent protection relating to the micro-gestures of a wearer's hand, used to control the headset. Similarly, Meta has obtained patent protection for wearable neuromuscular sensor bands to be worn on a user’s wrist or lower arm which could be used alongside external cameras on their recently announced ‘Orion’ prototype augmented reality glasses to recognise inputs for performing actions in augmented reality. 

Manufacturers or designers of such spatial technology products should be careful to ensure that the means of controlling their headsets do not infringe existing patent rights, and should also consider protection for their own innovations.

Interactions between the digital and real world

Where a mixed or augmented reality headset uses external cameras to recognise the real world and allow digital and physical elements to interact, there is a possibility that the use of the device may infringe the copyright or other intellectual property rights of others. Spatial technology headsets often use external cameras to record physical elements around a user, over which interactive digital elements can be superimposed. When doing so, these external cameras are likely to capture a variety of things protected by copyright law, such as artworks, sculptures, buildings or video. Where the headset records or analyses such works, there may be copyright infringement, unless such reproductions are licensed by the copyright owner or where a copyright exception applies. For example, while the recording of buildings and sculptures permanently situated in a public place is permitted under a ‘freedom of panorama’ exception in UK copyright law, this exception will not extend to two-dimensional artworks. As the adoption of spatial technologies increases, it is likely that disputes arise which will provide the courts with opportunities to clarify the relationship between spatial technology and copyright law.

Spatial technology designed for daily use, such as the Ray-Ban Meta Smart Glasses, allows users to take videos or stream video and share to social media platforms. Where background music is captured as part of those recordings or broadcasts, the relevant social media platforms will need to ensure that the copyright in those songs is not infringed. Meta applies a range of approaches to minimise the risk of copyright infringement by its Facebook users in such circumstances, including blocking or muting the audio of clips when copyright protected music is detected. 
In contrast, where brand names and logos are incidentally captured in the background of an augmented experience it is less likely that this will infringe the trade mark rights of those brand owners. In order to infringe under UK trade mark law, there is a requirement that there is a use of the trade mark without permission, occurring in the course of trade. However, if a developer deliberately wants to use third party brands in a virtual reality or metaverse environment, for example including branded products in a virtual shop, they will need to carefully consider such usage and obtain the appropriate licences for such use. 

Take a look at our data article and liability article for further discussions about the legal issues involved in spatial computing tech.