Does The Commercial Exploitation Of France’S National Domain Violate The Constitution?

Article L. 621-42  of the French Code du patrimoine (heritage Code) authorizes using the ikon of a edifice belonging to France’s national domain for commercial purposes, inward whatever medium, if such utilization has been authorized yesteryear the managing director of the building, yesteryear unilateral deed or contract, gratuitous of accuse or amongst fiscal compensation. No authorization is, however, required, if “the ikon is used inward the practise of populace service missions or for cultural, artistic, educational, teaching, query as well as information purposes as well as instance of the news.”

This is a recent law, equally this article was introduced yesteryear the July 7, 2016 law, no. 2016-925 close liberty to create, architecture as well as heritage) inward club to render buildings belonging to the national domain, such equally the Louvre, Chambord, or Fontainebleau, an chance to financially gain from the commercial utilization of their image.

This constabulary was enacted after the castle of Chambord unsuccessfully tried to preclude the commercial utilization of its ikon for advertising a beer. The ikon of the castle had likewise been used on a particular edition of beer bottles.

Visiting castles tin move brand you lot thirsty 

 

NGOs La Quadrature du Net as well as Wikimedia late joined forces to challenge the constitutionality of the decree implementing article L. 621-42, which created article R.621-99 of the Code du patrimoine. This article gives ability to the authorization inward accuse of the national domain to negotiate the fiscal atmospheric condition for the commercial utilization of its image. From plaintiffs’ betoken of view, the buildings inward France’s national domain are inward the populace domain, as well as thus gratuitous to last used, fifty-fifty for commercial purpose.

They argued that the access to civilization is a human right, protected yesteryear article fourteen of the European Convention on Human Rights, article 10 as well as xi of the French Declaration of Human Rights,  and yesteryear the Preamble to the French Constitution, which guarantee equal access to civilization for all, as well as that hence article R.621-99 violated the Constitution.

They likewise argued that the populace domain is protected yesteryear article 1 of Directive 2006/116/EC on the term of protection of copyright as well as for sure related rights, which states that a literary or artistic run revert to the populace domain seventy years after the give-up the ghost of the author, irrespective of the appointment when the run is lawfully made available to the public. As article ii of the Berne Convention includes architecture inward its Definition of literary as well as artistic works, they concluded that plant of architecture inward France’s national domain are inward the populace domain, as well as that the lawmakers cannot “artificially revive exploitation rights.”

The Ministry of Culture argued inward defense, rather surprisingly, that “[i]t has never been the intention of the lawmaker to constitute a government guaranteeing gratuitous exploitation of a run after the extinction of the economical rights of its owner.” Unless this refers to moral rights, which are perpetual as well as may sometimes impinge the commercial exploitation of a work, this declaration denies a basic concept of French copyright.

On Oct 25, the French Council of State, France’s highest administrative court, agreed to their asking to enquire the Constitutional Council whether article R.621-99 violated the Constitution. The Constitutional Council volition at i time create upwardly one's hear inside iii months whether the commercial exploitation of buildings inward the populace domain, merely belonging to France’s national domain, violates French Constitution. We’ll move along you lot informed.