French television channel France 24 is
reporting that Sakura art gallery in Paris has cancelled a Guillaume Verda exhibit
after he was accused on social
media of copying Jean-Michel Basquiat. The gallery did not cancel
because of the alleged copying, but cited public safety concerns, stating that the
artist had received threats on social media and by email.
Guillaume Verda has since made his Instagram
account private, and the Sakura gallery has taken off any references to the
exhibition from its site and closed the exhibition.
Is it copyright infringement?
Article
L.122-4 of the French Intellectual Property Code states that “Any complete or
partial performance or reproduction made without the consent of the author or
of his successors in title or assigns shall be unlawful. The same shall apply
to translation, adaptation or transformation, arrangement or reproduction by
any technique or process whatsoever.” Several tweets
presented Verda’s works next to Basquiat’s. Copying or inspiration?
When assessing whether a particular work is
infringing, courts first check if the work which was allegedly copied is
composed of new and original elements and then determine if these original elements
have been reproduced by the second work.
Verda’s works seems to have been painted in
a way which certainly brings the Basquiat in mind. So there are similarities.
Ideas are not protected by French law: les idées sont de libre parcours, ideas
are free to be used. A work must be original to be protected. It could also be
argued that both Basquiat and Verda were inspired by ancient African art which
is now in the public domain, and that the similarities are based on elements
which are not original.
But if the similarities are on original
elements of the first work, there is infringement.
If the similarities are obvious, bad faith
is assumed, and then it is the Defendant who must prove he was in good faith.
In this particular case, Verda did not seem to have hidden that Basquiat was a
source of inspiration, as he referenced him in hashtags. So, he cannot claim
that he did not know his works, and that the similarities are fortuitous, that this
is a “rencontre fortuite,” which
happens when two artists are creating a similar work without knowing each
other. It may happen, but it is quite rare.
It is only after having assessed the
similarities between the two works that the courts assess their differences. Here
would lie Verda’s defense, proving the differences between the works.
It should be noted that copyright
infringement and plagiarism do not have the same meaning under French law.
While the first is a crime, the second, le
plagiat, is a tort. The author of a work can decide not to sue for
copyright infringement, but for plagiat,
in a civil court, which will then assess whether the alleged plagiarism
constitutes unfair competition and parasitism.
No comments:
Post a Comment