{"title":"The Swiss Federal Supreme Court’s <i>Fire Ring</i> Decision and the Evaluation of Works of Applied Art Under Copyright Law – A Burning Topic","authors":"Gregor Rauch","doi":"10.1093/grurint/ikad101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In its most recent Fire Ring decision, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court had to rule on the copyright protection of works of applied art for the first time in several years. Works of applied art are included in the Swiss Copyright Act in Art. 2(2)(f) as a separate category of protected works, distinguished from other categories of works because they serve a utilitarian purpose and combine practical applicability with an additional aesthetic appeal. In light of the most recent CJEU decisions regarding copyright protection of works of applied art and industrial design, specifically its decisions in Brompton (GRUR International 2020, 969) and Cofemel (GRUR International 2020, 322) the Swiss Federal Supreme Court had the opportunity – not being directly bound by Union law – to position itself with regard to EU judicial practice and at the same time update its own sparse and partly outdated case law. However, it clearly failed to do so, not only from a legal-theoretical perspective but also from a case-specific perspective, and this raises some additional questions that deserve to be addressed.","PeriodicalId":487734,"journal":{"name":"GRUR international","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GRUR international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikad101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract In its most recent Fire Ring decision, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court had to rule on the copyright protection of works of applied art for the first time in several years. Works of applied art are included in the Swiss Copyright Act in Art. 2(2)(f) as a separate category of protected works, distinguished from other categories of works because they serve a utilitarian purpose and combine practical applicability with an additional aesthetic appeal. In light of the most recent CJEU decisions regarding copyright protection of works of applied art and industrial design, specifically its decisions in Brompton (GRUR International 2020, 969) and Cofemel (GRUR International 2020, 322) the Swiss Federal Supreme Court had the opportunity – not being directly bound by Union law – to position itself with regard to EU judicial practice and at the same time update its own sparse and partly outdated case law. However, it clearly failed to do so, not only from a legal-theoretical perspective but also from a case-specific perspective, and this raises some additional questions that deserve to be addressed.
在最近的Fire Ring案中,瑞士联邦最高法院几年来第一次对实用艺术作品的版权保护做出了裁决。《瑞士版权法》第2(2)(f)条将实用艺术作品列为受保护作品的单独类别,与其他类别的作品区别开来,因为它们服务于实用目的,并将实用性与额外的审美吸引力结合起来。鉴于欧洲法院最近关于应用艺术和工业设计作品版权保护的决定,特别是其在布朗普顿案(GRUR International 2020, 969)和科菲美案(GRUR International 2020, 322)中的决定,瑞士联邦最高法院有机会在不受欧盟法律直接约束的情况下,根据欧盟司法实践定位自己,同时更新自己的零散和部分过时的判例法。然而,不仅从法律理论的角度来看,而且从具体案件的角度来看,它显然没有做到这一点,这就提出了一些值得讨论的额外问题。