Corporations Convey No Moral Rights Over Industrial Plant Inward France, Fifty-Fifty If They Commissioned It

The French Cour de cassation, France’s highest judiciary court, held on Nov 16 that a enterprise cannot receive got moral rights over a work, fifty-fifty if it had commissioned the operate or if the operate was created past times 1 of its employees.  

Article L. 111-1 of the French intellectual belongings Code (CPI) gives authors both patrimonial as well as moral rights. Moral rights, which are perpetual, inalienable as well as imprescriptible, are the correct of honour for the author’s hollo as well as status, as well as the correct of the honour of the integrity of the work.

In this case, an advertising agency, which rights directly belongs to the Maetva corporation, had commissioned a corporation, G. studio, to accept photographs of watches to illustrate a catalog published past times the Pierre L. corporation, a watchmaker.

The Pierre L.corporation used these photographs a twelvemonth afterwards for a novel advertising campaign, which was featured on omnibus stops, magazines as well as online. G. studio establish this novel utilisation to hold out infringing, equally it claimed that it had alone sold the rights inwards the photographs for their utilisation inwards the catalog. G. studio sued the Pierre L. corporation for copyright infringement as well as Pierre L. called Maetva into the proceedings.

As y'all tin see, no physical mortal is purpose of the procedure, alone corporations. The final result of which enterprise owned the patrimonial rights of the photographs was debated inwards the lower courts, as well as the Court of appeals establish that they belonged to G. studio, equally did thus, necessarily, the moral rights

The Cour de cassation refused to dominion on the final result of patrimonial rights, argument that reviewing them would impinge on the exclusive rights of the lower courts to approximate the amount of prejudice. However, it ruled on the final result of moral rights ownership. For the Court, the author, if the writer is a physical person, enjoys an inalienable correct to honour for his name, his lineament as well as his work. Therefore, fifty-fifty if the writer created the operate equally purpose of an work contract, “neither the existence of a contract of work nor ownership of the fabric back upward of the operate are probable to confer on the enterprise employing the writer the enjoyment of that right.” The Cour de cassation did non post the representative dorsum to the Court of appeals for remand, equally at that topographic point is no postulate to approximate the amount inwards damages for violation of the moral rights, equally these rights but exercise non belong to G. studio.

Corporations cannot ain the moral rights of a operate nether French law, fifty-fifty if they commissioned it, fifty-fifty if the operate was created past times an employee, as well as fifty-fifty if they ain the patrimonial rights. The moral rights to the photographs at stake belong to the physical mortal who took them: whoever she is, she was non a political party to this lawsuit. For the sake of this discussion, let’s add together that if is truthful that the photographs were used without mentioning her name, she would receive got the correct to sue Pierre L. for failing to expose her name, equally this is a violation of her moral correct to paternity of a work.

Even if the lensman had signed a contract transferring all her rights to the pictures, the contract could non receive got transferred her moral rights, fifty-fifty if the contract would receive got explicitly, but illegally, mentioned them equally beingness ceded, because moral rights cannot hold out transferred nether French law.

This representative should serve equally a alarm for corporations acquiring the patrimonial rights of a operate inwards a dry reason which recognizes perpetual as well as inalienable moral tights, such equally France, that the physical mortal who took the movie retains his moral rights forever. This is the representative fifty-fifty if the police of the contract is the police of a dry reason which does non recognize such rights, equally inwards the U.S.; run into for representative Paris Court of appeals, Feb 1, 1989, (D. 1990. 52).

Image is courtesy of Flickr user Flash Columbia  under a CC BY-NC 2.0 license.