| Deckmyn v Vandersteen | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Submitted 8 April 2013 Decided 3 December 2014 | |
| Full case name | Johan Deckmyn and Vrijheidsfonds VZW vs Helena Vandersteen, Christiane Vandersteen, Liliana Vandersteen, Isabelle Vandersteen, Rita Dupont, Amoras II CVOH and WPG Uitgevers België |
| Case | C‑201/13 |
| CelexID | 62013CC0201 |
| ECLI | ECLI:EU:C:2014:2132 |
| Case type | Reference for a preliminary ruling |
| Chamber | Full chamber |
| Language of proceedings | Dutch |
| Nationality of parties | Belgium |
| Procedural history | Reference of the court of appeal of Brussels (Belgium) |
| Court composition | |
| Judge-Rapporteur A. Prechal | |
| President V. Skouris | |
| Judges | |
| Advocate General P. Cruz Villalón | |
| Instruments cited | |
| Information Society Directive | |
| Keywords | |
| definition of parody in the Information Society Directive (Directive 2001/29/EC) | |
Johan Deckmyn and Vrijheidsfonds VZW vs Helena Vandersteen, Christiane Vandersteen, Liliana Vandersteen, Isabelle Vandersteen, Rita Dupont, Amoras II CVOH and WPG Uitgevers België is a preliminary ruling by the European Court of Justice. The reference concerned what conditions must be met for a derivative work to be considered a parody. Parodies are allowed under the Information Society Directive, in those countries that have indicated to apply the parody exception. The European Court of Justice indicated that the definition of the copyright exceptions was consistent throughout the EU (and given "an autonomous meaning" within the directive) and that to qualify the work must "evoke an existing work, while being noticeably different from it, and secondly, to constitute an expression of humour or mockery". The humour or mockery does not need to be directed towards the work itself, but it can also be mockery of something/someone else. When considering a parody-case the court should strike a fair balance between the rights of the rights holders of the original work, as the maker of the parody.
The ruling was requested by the court of appeal (Dutch: hof van beroep) of Brussels (Belgium) in a case of Vlaams Belang politician Johan Deckmyn who had copied a cover of Spike and Suzy (Dutch: Suske en Wiske), in which he had positioned Daniël Termont, the mayor of Ghent. The rights holders of the comic had sued Deckmyn for copyright infringement. Because the interpretation of EU law was involved in the case, the Belgian court made the reference.
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search