3D printing is a versatile tool that can be used to create anything from a simple pencil to an entire building, which can be scanned, transformed into an algorithm and then re-materialized by a machine that literally sculpts it in just 48 hours.
In the artistic field, the applications are potentially boundless, and today, architects and fashion houses are increasingly making use of 3D printers to implement their projects, containing costs and also reducing the environmental impact of production.
But it is in the world of sculpture that the use of three-dimensional milling techniques have come to the forefront with a recent Italian Court case which shows that, while it is true that 3D printing is a great opportunity for innovation in the artistic world, the widespread circulation on the internet of files containing information suitable for reproduction through 3D printers can rise new between IP owners and third party users.
This is what happened with a sculpture made with innovative techniques and designed in one of the European centers of excellence of woodworking: Val Gardena.
This place, which is known in Italy and abroad as the home of religious craftsmanship; in this market, the Demetz family has been active for generations in the creation of sculptures that today it designs and manufactures through the use of advanced methods.
In order to realize a statue commissioned by an American dealer in 2019, the Demetz Art Studio L.t.d., once completed the realization of a drawing and of a first wooden example, turned to a Florentine company to carry out the robotic milling of the statue starting from a 3D scan, which was delivered to the company in a special file, with the express indication to return it or destroy it and, in any case, not to make other specimens of the statue.
Once the milling had been completed and the statue delivered to the United States, the Demetz family noticed on Facebook a post containing a photograph, taken in the same factory where the milling had been carried out that depicted the same identical statue they had commissioned; following to a surprise inspection, they also found on site another copy of the statue being processed and its image inserted in a brochure.
Not having obtained the restitution of the file of the 3D scan, which allowed the realization of the copies of the statue, Demetz Art Studio L.t.d. commenced a preliminary injunction proceedings before the Court of Florence, asking for description, seizure and injunction of the file, the copies of the statue and the promotional material on which it was represented.
The Court granted an inaudita altera parte decree and, in confirming the measure, highlighted several aspects related to the protection afforded by copyright to creative works.
The first interesting aspect of the provision concerns, in general terms, the relationship between artistic creation and new crafting technologies: according to the Court, the creativity and authorship requirements laid down in law for the protection of a work of art are not lost when the same is transposed into a digital image and then mechanically reproduced, not even in cases where the realization of these stages of processing have involved the executive intervention of third parties.
Taking a position specifically on the illicit exploitation of copyright, the Court has disregarded the argument of the respondent who claimed to have used the image of the statue on the leaflets and brochures only to show his craftsmanship.
The Court held that even the representation and use of a copyrighted work show the executive skills of a craftsman constitutes an economical use, oriented to advertising and, absent the authorization of the author, it also integrates a violation of copyright.
By recognizing the creative nature of the statue, the Court of Florence applied art. 12 paragraph 2 of the Italian copyright law, which establishes that the author has the exclusive right to use the work economically in any form and manner.
Since the use of another person's work is aimed in this case at pursuing an economic advantage, such as gaining prominence and notoriety among the public, the system of exceptions and limitations provided for by Italian copyright law could not find application.
In fact, by virtue of Art. 70 of the Italian copyright law, copyrighted work can be used for free - and without any authorization from the author - in all cases where the protection of copyright is in conflict with preminent objectives and values that are often in antithesis with it (e.g. freedom of expression and communication, protection of users' privacy, artistic and scientific progress, etc.).
In this scenario, the 2019 Copyright Directive – that will be soon transposed in Italy - has intervened by making copyright exemptions (such as quotation, criticism, review and uses for the purpose of caricature and parody) the subject of mandatory regulation for all EU member states.
Court of Florence, order of January 7, 2021