-
1.
It follows from the combination of Art. 10(2) and Art. 13 Copyright Act that
-
a.
the creator of the adaptation cannot derive any rights from the copyrighted features or elements that he took over from the original work;
-
b.
the copyright owned by the creator of the adaptation is limited to those elements that he adds to the original and that pass the work test.
-
2.
If the adaptation passes the test and also contains sufficient copyrighted traits or elements of the original work, it is both an independent work, copyright in which lies with the creator of the adaptation, and a reproduction of the original work, copyright in which lies with the creator of the original work.
-
3.
If copyright in the original work and copyright in the adaptation are both in the same hands, that copyright owner may assert both copyrights against a third party that infringes them. However, such cumulative ownership does not mean that copyright in the adaptation also includes copyright in the original work.
Notes
District Court of The Hague, 10 October 2018, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:12254.
District Court of The Hague, 6 April 2021, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2021:1371.
Cf. Supreme Court, 22 February 2013, ECLI:NL:HR:2013:BY1529, para. 3.4(a).
CJEU, 11 June 2020, Brompton Bicycle, ECLI:EU:C:2020:461, paras. 23–27 [IIC 51:773 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-020-00957-4].
Supreme Court, 19 May 2017, ECLI:NL:HR:2017:938, para. 3.4.4.
Author information
Consortia
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Translated from the Dutch by Gwyneth Little.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koninklijke Philips N.V. and Philips Consumer Lifestyle B.V. v. Lidl Nederland GmbH, Lidl Stiftung & Co KG and Kompernaß Handels GmbH Copyright Act, Arts. 10(2), 13. “Philips Shavers”. IIC (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-024-01461-9
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-024-01461-9