The Court of Justice on the protection of Charles Eames' DSW Chair.
On 24 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that EU countries cannot deny the protection of Copyright to original works of applied art only because they originate from third countries that do not offer similar protection. As long as a work meets the EU definition of originality, it must be protected by copyright law. Copyright of the EU, regardless of where it was created or who authored it.
This ruling, which follows a request from the Dutch Supreme Court, reinforces the EU's commitment to a system of copyright unified based on originality rather than country of origin.
Context: The Vitra vs. Kwantum case
The case involves Vitra, a Swiss furniture company that owns the rights to the designs of American designers Charles and Ray Eames. One of their famous creations, the Dining Sidechair Wood (DSW Chair) , was designed in 1950 for a competition by the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA).
Kwantum, a Belgian-Dutch furniture retailer, sold a similar chair, called the “Paris Chair,” which Vitra claimed was a copy of the DSW Chair. Vitra sued Kwantum in the Netherlands for infringement of the copyright .
The Dutch Supreme Court has asked the CJEU whether EU countries can deny the protection of copyright to foreign works on the basis of the reciprocity clause of the Berne Convention. This clause establishes that if a non-EU country does not protect a type of work with the Copyright , even an EU country can refuse to protect it.
The ruling of the CJEU
The CJEU has ruled that EU countries cannot use the reciprocity clause of the Berne Convention to deny the protection of Copyright . In contrast, EU law (specifically the Infosoc Directive 2001/29) takes precedence and requires equal protection for all original works.
Highlights of the decision
Originality is the only requirement
The protection of the Copyright in the EU it is based exclusively on originality.
Previous cases (such as Cofemel and Brompton Bicycle) have confirmed that if a work is original, it qualifies for trademark protection. copyright .
Copyright harmonized across the EU
Allowing individual EU countries to apply different rules would undermine the aim of having a system of copyright unified.
Respect for fundamental rights
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU protects the Copyright as a fundamental right.
Only the EU legislator (not individual countries) can decide whether foreign works should receive limited protection.
Equal treatment for foreign works
Unlike the duration of the Copyright and resale rights, the law on Copyright The EU does not provide for reciprocity rules.
The Infosoc Directive applies regardless of where the work was created or the nationality of the author.
Impact of the decision
La sentenza conferma che tutte le opere originali devono essere trattate allo stesso modo ai sensi della legge sul diritto d'autore dell'UE, indipendentemente dal loro paese d'origine. Ciò rafforza la protezione del diritto d'autore in tutta l'UE e garantisce che gli artisti e i designer extracomunitari godano degli stessi diritti dei creatori residenti nell'UE.
However, the ruling also raises some concerns. By stating that all works meeting the originality standard must be protected, the CJEU may have overlooked whether the EU actually intended to regulate access to Copyright of foreign authors in this way.
Nevertheless, the decision opens the EU market to a greater number of foreign works, offering protection also to creators from countries that do not protect their Copyright for its citizens.
Conclusion
This ruling represents a significant step toward a single, unified copyright system in the EU . Although some legal experts debate whether this approach was the EU's original intention, the result is clear: all original works are protected in the EU, regardless of their origin.