⋆ ⋆ ⋆
LML4801: PATENT AND COPYRIGHT LAW
May/June Examination 2026 — Comprehensive Revision Guide
Covers Past Papers: 2023 – 2025
⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆
Intellectual Property Law — UNISA LLB Programme
Exam Revision Guide
LML4801
Module Code:
Patent and Copyright Law
Module Name:
May/June 2023, May/June 2024, May/June 2025
Papers Covered:
May/June 2026
Target Exam:
80 marks per paper
Total Marks:
4 Hours (open book)
Duration:
Focus on understanding the law, not memorisation. Apply principles to facts.
Exam Revision Notes | LML4801 | 2023–2026
,LML4801 | Exam Revision Patent & Copyright Law
PART A: MAY/JUNE 2023 EXAMINATION
80 Marks · 6 Questions · All Questions Compulsory
First Examiner: Prof M du Bois Second Examiner: Dr RM Shay
The scenario below applies to Questions 1 to 6. Read it carefully before attempting
any question.
Sam is a student at a South African university. For one of his assignments, he copies
several paragraphs directly from ChatGPT, an AI language model, and submits
them as his own work without acknowledgement. His lecturer, Dr Venter, spots this
and approaches the university’s IP law clinic.
Separately, Luke is a South African musician who has written and recorded a song
called “She Saw Me First”. The song has become popular. A music group called The
Picks — whose members include Rachel R, a well-known vocalist — want Rachel
to perform “She Saw Me First” at their upcoming Cape Town and Durban concerts,
which will not be recorded. Luke has not given permission. Meanwhile, Luke discov-
ers that a streaming platform has uploaded his song without a licence, and that a
local radio station has been broadcasting it during its breakfast show.
Finally, a South African biotech company, Pangolin Products (Pty) Ltd, run by
Megan, begins manufacturing and selling grass paper using a grass delignification
process that Megan herself developed. Graham’s patent (applied for in 2014) claims
a similar process. Megan found the process in a 1990 engineering textbook and
added two substances of her own: substance A (for greater pulp yield) and substance
B (to reduce the odour created by the process). Graham’s attorney sends a cease-
and-desist letter.
Page 2 of 41
,LML4801 | Exam Revision Patent & Copyright Law
Question 1 [10 marks]
Question: Sam submits the unchanged ChatGPT paragraphs as his own work. Sup-
pose you are Sam’s classmate. His submission has just been made public as part of a
peer-review exercise. You notice that the paragraphs are word-for-word from ChatGPT.
Discuss whether copyright subsists in AI-generated text, and whether Sam’s submission
could amount to plagiarism under South African law. [10]
Answer: Does copyright subsist in AI-generated text?
The Copyright Act 98 of 1978 protects “works” — but only if a human author created
them. That is the starting point, and it matters here. ChatGPT is not a legal person.
No court in South Africa has yet held that a non-human entity can hold or generate
copyright. So the paragraphs Sam copied are, strictly speaking, likely to be unpro-
tected by copyright under the current Act, since there is no identifiable human
author.
That said, worth noting here: the position is genuinely unsettled. The Copyright
Amendment Bill of 2017, though not yet signed into law, introduced the concept
of computer-generated works and proposed that the person who made the ar-
rangements for the work’s creation would be deemed the author. If such a provision
eventually takes effect, the platform or developer behind ChatGPT could arguably
claim authorship — which would then give the AI output protection.
Is Sam’s conduct plagiarism?
Plagiarism, at common law and under university policy, is the act of presenting some-
one else’s intellectual output as your own without acknowledgement. Even if no
copyright subsists, Sam’s conduct is problematic. He has:
• presented work he did not create as his own original contribution;
• offered no acknowledgement of the AI tool or its output;
• potentially misled his institution about the nature of his work.
Most South African universities’ academic integrity policies treat AI-assisted submis-
sion without disclosure as a form of academic misconduct — regardless of whether
copyright is technically infringed. UNISA itself expressly prohibits the use of AI tools
like ChatGPT during examinations and assessments.
Conclusion: The AI text is likely not copyright-protected under current law, so
Page 3 of 41
, LML4801 | Exam Revision Patent & Copyright Law
there is probably no copyright infringement. But the conduct is academically dishon-
est and may violate university plagiarism rules. These are different things — and the
distinction matters for what consequences Sam could face.
Exam Tip
Examiners want you to distinguish between copyright infringement (a legal
question) and plagiarism (an academic misconduct question). State both
clearly and do not conflate them.
Page 4 of 41
LML4801: PATENT AND COPYRIGHT LAW
May/June Examination 2026 — Comprehensive Revision Guide
Covers Past Papers: 2023 – 2025
⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆ ⋄ ⋆
Intellectual Property Law — UNISA LLB Programme
Exam Revision Guide
LML4801
Module Code:
Patent and Copyright Law
Module Name:
May/June 2023, May/June 2024, May/June 2025
Papers Covered:
May/June 2026
Target Exam:
80 marks per paper
Total Marks:
4 Hours (open book)
Duration:
Focus on understanding the law, not memorisation. Apply principles to facts.
Exam Revision Notes | LML4801 | 2023–2026
,LML4801 | Exam Revision Patent & Copyright Law
PART A: MAY/JUNE 2023 EXAMINATION
80 Marks · 6 Questions · All Questions Compulsory
First Examiner: Prof M du Bois Second Examiner: Dr RM Shay
The scenario below applies to Questions 1 to 6. Read it carefully before attempting
any question.
Sam is a student at a South African university. For one of his assignments, he copies
several paragraphs directly from ChatGPT, an AI language model, and submits
them as his own work without acknowledgement. His lecturer, Dr Venter, spots this
and approaches the university’s IP law clinic.
Separately, Luke is a South African musician who has written and recorded a song
called “She Saw Me First”. The song has become popular. A music group called The
Picks — whose members include Rachel R, a well-known vocalist — want Rachel
to perform “She Saw Me First” at their upcoming Cape Town and Durban concerts,
which will not be recorded. Luke has not given permission. Meanwhile, Luke discov-
ers that a streaming platform has uploaded his song without a licence, and that a
local radio station has been broadcasting it during its breakfast show.
Finally, a South African biotech company, Pangolin Products (Pty) Ltd, run by
Megan, begins manufacturing and selling grass paper using a grass delignification
process that Megan herself developed. Graham’s patent (applied for in 2014) claims
a similar process. Megan found the process in a 1990 engineering textbook and
added two substances of her own: substance A (for greater pulp yield) and substance
B (to reduce the odour created by the process). Graham’s attorney sends a cease-
and-desist letter.
Page 2 of 41
,LML4801 | Exam Revision Patent & Copyright Law
Question 1 [10 marks]
Question: Sam submits the unchanged ChatGPT paragraphs as his own work. Sup-
pose you are Sam’s classmate. His submission has just been made public as part of a
peer-review exercise. You notice that the paragraphs are word-for-word from ChatGPT.
Discuss whether copyright subsists in AI-generated text, and whether Sam’s submission
could amount to plagiarism under South African law. [10]
Answer: Does copyright subsist in AI-generated text?
The Copyright Act 98 of 1978 protects “works” — but only if a human author created
them. That is the starting point, and it matters here. ChatGPT is not a legal person.
No court in South Africa has yet held that a non-human entity can hold or generate
copyright. So the paragraphs Sam copied are, strictly speaking, likely to be unpro-
tected by copyright under the current Act, since there is no identifiable human
author.
That said, worth noting here: the position is genuinely unsettled. The Copyright
Amendment Bill of 2017, though not yet signed into law, introduced the concept
of computer-generated works and proposed that the person who made the ar-
rangements for the work’s creation would be deemed the author. If such a provision
eventually takes effect, the platform or developer behind ChatGPT could arguably
claim authorship — which would then give the AI output protection.
Is Sam’s conduct plagiarism?
Plagiarism, at common law and under university policy, is the act of presenting some-
one else’s intellectual output as your own without acknowledgement. Even if no
copyright subsists, Sam’s conduct is problematic. He has:
• presented work he did not create as his own original contribution;
• offered no acknowledgement of the AI tool or its output;
• potentially misled his institution about the nature of his work.
Most South African universities’ academic integrity policies treat AI-assisted submis-
sion without disclosure as a form of academic misconduct — regardless of whether
copyright is technically infringed. UNISA itself expressly prohibits the use of AI tools
like ChatGPT during examinations and assessments.
Conclusion: The AI text is likely not copyright-protected under current law, so
Page 3 of 41
, LML4801 | Exam Revision Patent & Copyright Law
there is probably no copyright infringement. But the conduct is academically dishon-
est and may violate university plagiarism rules. These are different things — and the
distinction matters for what consequences Sam could face.
Exam Tip
Examiners want you to distinguish between copyright infringement (a legal
question) and plagiarism (an academic misconduct question). State both
clearly and do not conflate them.
Page 4 of 41
