Senaka Weeraratna

The ‘Spirit of Cricket’ is often cited as a moral compass for the game, emphasizing sportsmanship and the acceptance of on-field decisions. However, in the context of the Decision Review System (DRS), this ideal faces a complex challenge regarding intellectual property (IP) rights, particularly concerning the claims of Sri Lankan lawyer

https://share.google/aimode/Sqbm3nkeVQCksMaQX

.The Intellectual Property Dispute

The primary conflict lies between the formal adoption of DRS by the ICC and the earlier conception of the “Player Referral” system. 

• Authorship Claim:

Senaka Weeraratna

claims to be the original inventor, having published the “Player Referral” concept in The Australian in March 1997. He argues the current DRS is identical to his proposal, which allowed players to appeal to a third umpire with a limited number of reviews.

• ICC’s Position: The ICC maintains it has no copyright over DRS. Former ICC Legal Head David Becker stated in 2010 that the Cricket Committee was unaware of Weeraratna’s work and that by publishing openly without a patent, he effectively waived his right to confidentiality.
• Spirit vs. Legalism: Critics argue that while the ICC may have no legal obligation due to a lack of formal registration, the “Spirit of Cricket” should dictate that administrators act fairly and recognize original contributors. 

Governance and Commercial Interests

The administration of DRS technology further complicates the notion of a shared “spirit” through its commercial and logistical structure:

• Ownership and Costs: Technology used in DRS, such as Hawk-Eye and UltraEdge, is owned and licensed by private entities. For bilateral series, the host boards and broadcasters typically bear the costs of implementing the system, which can lead to inconsistencies in the technology used at different venues.
• Strategic Disparities: Because DRS is not mandatory for all bilateral series and requires mutual consent, wealthier boards can influence its implementation, potentially creating an uneven playing field that contradicts the principle of universal fairness.
• Institutional Fairness: Weeraratna’s supporters highlight the Doctrine of Constructive Notice, suggesting the ICC should be legally presumed to have known about his widely published concept. The failure to acknowledge this is seen by some as a breach of “administrative fairness”. 

Key DRS Components and Developers

Technology	Function	Ownership/Association
Hawk-Eye	Ball-tracking and trajectory prediction	Hawk-Eye Innovations (Sony Group)
UltraEdge	Detects minute ball-bat contact via sound	Often provided by host broadcasters
Hot Spot	Uses infrared imaging to highlight contact points	BBG Sports
Player Referral	The concept of allowing players to challenge decisions	Claimed by Senaka Weeraratna (1997)

The tension persists because while DRS was intended to uphold the spirit of the game by reducing human error, its lack of recognition for its conceptual origins is viewed by some as an ethical failure of the very spirit the ICC seeks to protect. 

SOURCE:  AI Overvierw