Judgment from Cologne: Photo wallpapers in holiday apartments legally controversial!

Judgment from Cologne: Photo wallpapers in holiday apartments legally controversial!

A current judgment of the Cologne Regional Court raises questions about the use of copyright -protected motifs in commercial apartments. The owner of such an apartment had published photos of her rooms, which were provided with photographs of wallpaper. The court decided that this publication is an inadmissible use of the copyright -protected motive, since photography and publishing was evaluated as reproduction and public access to the author, which is reserved for the author. This judgment does not only affect the owner concerned, but also has far -reaching implications for creative entrepreneurs: inside, which threatens legal uncertainty through various judicial decisions. The Cologne District Court stated that the wallpaper should not be regarded as an insignificant accessory and violated the author's reputation, while the Düsseldorf district court judged in a similar case in favor of the user, since photography was assessed as a common use, which makes the legal differences between the dishes clear.

The topic of the "unrequited accessories" represents an interesting legal delimitation in copyright legislation. According to § 57 UrhG, a copyright -protected work may be depicted in another work, as long as it is an insignificant accessory. This regulation is therefore significant when it comes to commercializing photos that contain works by third parties. There is an insignificant accessory if the work is easy to interchangeable and the effect of the main work is not significantly influenced, as can be the case with wallpaper patterns or landscapes that are visible in the background of an image. As the Cologne District Court demonstrates, this classification is often subjective and controversial.

legal uncertainties for creative entrepreneurs: inside

Particularly challenging for the actors in the creative industries remains the fact that the application of the unclear regulation of the insignificant accessory leads to potential legal consequences. The decision of the Cologne Regional Court is a clear indication that the purely visual inspiration of copyrighted works is not easily covered. In contrast, other judgments are less restrictive, as the decision of the Düsseldorf Regional Court shows, which recognized photography as a regular use of the wallpaper. Such different judgments lead to uncertainty about which uses really use in individual cases and can thus inhibit the creative process.

In addition, the Podcast "Coffee Right" gives insights into other curious judgments in copyright law, which shed light on the complexity and complexity of the topic. Cases such as "Naruto vs. Slater", in which it was decided that only people can be considered to be the author of works, as well as the dispute over drone photography, in which the Hamm OLG decided that such photos do not automatically fall under the panoramic freedom. There is also a persistent legal dispute over the permissible artistic imitation of a music sample from Kraftwerk.

important aspects for creative use

One of the essential knowledge for creative entrepreneurs: Inside from the judgments described, the need to handle copyright -protected content, especially in the background. It is advisable to secure clear usage rights when buying design elements and realistically evaluate the legal regulations such as panoramic freedom. Here is the burden of proof with the user, as the Berlin copyright emphasizes. It remains necessary to raise awareness of the complexity of copyright and to create legal clarity in advance in order to prevent legal problems.