No copyright was recognized for a freelance illustrator who had created illustrations intended for use on the packaging of a cosmetic company’s spray product. The lack of originality in these illustrations, the absence of contractual liability, and the absence of fraud are at the heart of this ruling.
An illustrator created eleven illustrations for a cosmetics company to be included in the package inserts for a thermal water spray, as part of a licensing agreement limited to one million copies per three-year period.
Believing that the cosmetics company had used these illustrations beyond this limit (amounting to nearly 188 million printed leaflets) and beyond the contractual term set to expire on December 31, 2021, the illustrator and her agent sued the company for copyright infringement, fraud, and breach of contract.
The Court dismissed their claims.
➡️ The Court notes that copyright protection requires that the work bear the imprint of its author’s personality, characterized by free and creative choices, within the meaning of the Infopaq, Painer, and Football Dataco case law (CJEU, July 16, 2009, Case C-5/08; CJEU, Dec. 1, 2011, No. C-145/10; CJEU, Mar. 1, 2012, No. C-604/10).
➡️ It believes that the illustrations were created under necessarily restrictive conditions: the commission called for illustrating eleven steps for using the spray—identical to those already illustrated by a previous artist—to be included in the product’s instructions for use, in accordance with the brand’s established visual guidelines.
➡️ According to the judges, the clean, …
