The CJUE Neutralizes the Reciprocity Rule of Article 2, §7 of the Berne Convention for Works Originating from a Non-EEE Country
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJUE) now effectively neutralizes the reciprocity rule found in Article 2, §7 of the Berne Convention for works originating from a third country outside the European Economic Area (EEE). This shift has immediate consequences for stakeholders in the fields of design and copyright, illustrating the expanding scope of EU copyright harmonization. Below, we outline the core aspects of this change, moving from the overarching principle to its practical implications in a structured manner.
Context and Legal Foundations
- The Berne Convention and EU Law
We observe that the Berne Convention has historically allowed signatory states to apply a principle of reciprocity to artistic and applied works from countries that did not offer equivalent protection. Recently, however, the CJUE clarified that the harmonization achieved by European directives (notably Directive 2001/29/EC) supersedes individual Member States’ prerogative to rely on reciprocity in areas that the EU has fully regulated. This decision stems from the principle that only the EU legislator may introduce exceptions or limitations once an aspect of copyright law has been harmonized across Member States. - Official Sources and Regulatory References
According to the CJUE’s interpretation, Member States must refrain from applying reciprocity where EU law intends for equal treatment, irrespective of an author’s nationality or a work’s country of origin.
Key CJUE Decision of 24 October 2024
CJUE, 1re ch., 24 Oct. 2024, Aff. C-227/23, Kwantum Nederland BV, Kwantum België BV c/ Vitra Collections AG
In its landmark ruling of 24 October 2024, the CJUE held that Member States cannot apply material reciprocity under Article 2, §7 of the Berne Convention to refuse or limit copyright protection for works of applied art originating in a non-EEE country. By doing so, the Court confirmed that only the EU legislator may decide on any limitation to economic rights granted under harmonized directives. The decision underscores the principle that national rules tied to the country of origin become inoperative where the EU has established overarching copyright norms.
Impact on Protection for Artistic and Applied Works
- Extended Copyright for Third-Country Creations
By neutralizing the reciprocity rule, the CJUE effectively grants works originating from countries outside the EEE a level of protection in line with EU standards, provided they meet the originality and other formal criteria under EU law. This shift primarily benefits foreign creators of designs, industrial models, and artworks who previously faced potential restrictions if their home jurisdictions did not offer reciprocal protection. - Reinforced Harmonization and Legal Certainty
From a business and innovation standpoint, uniform copyright protection across the EU promotes legal certainty. Designers, manufacturers, and distributors now operate under clearer guidelines, facilitating smoother market entry and fewer obstacles linked to a work’s geographic origin.
Practical Consequences for Rights Holders
- Easier Enforcement: Foreign authors or rights holders can assert their copyrights uniformly throughout the EU, without having to prove reciprocal treatment in their home country.
- Encouraged Cross-Border Collaboration: Companies in the EEE may confidently license or acquire designs from third countries, knowing that these rights enjoy robust backing under EU directives.
- Reassessment of Agreements: Existing contracts or licenses that assumed limited rights based on reciprocity might need a thorough legal review to align with the CJUE’s position.
Recommended Next Steps & Best Practices
- Monitor Legislative Updates: Future EU legislative initiatives may further define or refine limitations.
- Review IP Portfolios: Rights holders should ensure that new or ongoing filings for design or copyright registration reflect this updated landscape.
- Consult Specialized Counsel: Given the complexity of international IP rights, professional guidance is indispensable to navigate cross-border transactions effectively.
The CJUE takes on profound significance for EU copyright enforcement. We advise rights holders, designers, and businesses to adapt proactively to this refined legal environment.
- Subscribe to Our Newsletter: Stay informed about important rulings and policy shifts.
- Follow Us on social media: Engage with our professional community for timely updates and best practices.
At Dreyfus Law Firm, we stand ready to provide comprehensive legal strategies tailored to each client’s needs. Our services include advising on copyright registration and enforcement, brand and design protection, domain name portfolio management, licensing and transfer negotiations, anti-counterfeiting initiatives, and litigation support across multiple jurisdictions.
Dreyfus Law Firm is in partnership with a global network of Intellectual Property attorneys, ensuring comprehensive assistance for businesses worldwide.
Join us on social media !
FAQ
1. Does this ruling apply to all creative works?
Yes. It covers any original work under EU copyright law, including works of applied art and design.
2. What if my home country does not protect such works at all?
Under the CJUE’s new interpretation, EU protection still applies if the work meets EU originality standards.
3. Will this affect the duration of protection?
The CJUE’s decision concerns the scope of protection, not duration. However, the EU already has specific rules on duration that Member States must respect.
