Determining the Applicable Law to Copyright Ownership: National Treatment Principle in Tension with Legacy Copyright Treaties

Jan Hodermarsky

doi:10.17323/2072-8166.2025.1.217.246

Jan Hodermarsky Masaryk University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6585-8783

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2025.1.217.246

Keywords: applicable law to copyright ownership, national treatment principle, conflict of international treaties, Article 20 of the Berne Convention, copyright ownership, copyright conflict-of-laws, lex loci protectionis, lex originis

Abstract

The present article examines a potential conflict between the national treatment principle, which is enshrined in most significant multilateral copyright treaties, on the one hand, and legacy copyright treaties — primarily bilateral ones, but also certain multilateral treaties such as the Montevideo Convention — containing conflict-of-laws rules not fully compatible with the national treatment principle, on the other. The analysis places special focus on the conflict-of-laws issue of copyright ownership. While the national treatment principle is often interpreted as mandating the application of lex loci protectionis, some legacy copyright treaties prescribe the application of lex originis or use other connecting factors for determining the law applicable to copyright ownership. The paper analyzes how such conflicts are to be resolved, focusing particularly on the interpretation of Article 20 of the Berne Convention. Through examination of case law and scholarly views, it is argued that Article 20 allows for the application of particular provisions of legacy copyright treaties on the condition that their application implies granting authors/right holders in the particular case more extensive rights, even if these provisions contradict the national treatment principle, which is one of the fundamental principles of the Berne Convention and, in general, of modern international copyright law. It is concluded that courts must assess the applicability of provisions contained in specific international treaties on a case-by-case basis, striving to reconcile competing provisions where feasible, in line with the principle of systemic interpretation inherent in international law. Overall, the analysis reveals that the applicability of conflict-of-laws rules contained in legacy copyright treaties, which might be non-compliant with the national treatment principle, is, under certain conditions, not excluded, even when the Berne Convention is on the particular case generally applicable. The complex relationship between sources of particular international law requires a nuanced approach to resolving potential conflicts between them.

Author Biography

Jan Hodermarsky, Masaryk University

PhD student

References

Bertrand A. (2010) Droit d'auteur. 3e éd. Paris: Dalloz, 978 p.

Boguslavsky M.M. (1973) Copyright Issues in International Relations. Moscow: Nauka, 336 p. (in Russ.)

Bowker R. (1912) Copyright, its History and its Law. Boston/New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 709 p.

Bureau D. (2001) Les conflicts de conventions. Droit international privé: travaux du Comité français de droit international privé, vol. 14, pp. 201-242. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/tcfdi.2001.1106

Čepelka Č. (1986) Právo mezinárodních smluv. Vídeňská úmluva o smluvním právu (1969) — s komentářem. Praha: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 185 p.

Desbois H., Françon A., Kéréver A. (1976) Les conventions internationales du droit d'auteur et des droits voisins. Paris: Dalloz, 452 p.

Despagnet F. (1909) Précis de droit international privé. 5e éd. Paris: L. Larose & L. Tenin, 1250 p.

Dreier T., Hugenholtz P.B. (2006) Concise European Copyright Law. 1st ed. Alphen an den Rijn: Kluwer Law International, 476 p.

Goldstein M. (1995) Derecho de autor. Buenos Aires: Ediciones La Rocca, 736 p.

Khadjavi-Gontard B. (1977) Der Grundsatz der Inländerbehandlung im internationa len Urheberrecht. Berlin: J. Schweitzer Verlag, 115 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112321300

Klass N. (2007) Das Urheberkollisionsrecht der ersten Inhaberschaft — Plädoyer für einen universalen Ansatz. Gewerblicher Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht-Internationaler Teil, pp. 373-386.

Krejci H. (2002) Privatrecht. 5. Aufl. Wien: Manzsche Verlag, 284 p.

Kur A., Dreier T. (2013) European Intellectual Property Law: Text, Cases and Mate rials. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 592 p.

Leška R. (2019) Presumption of Authorship under the Berne Convention and its Application in the Online Environment. In: Y. Gendreau (ed.) Le droit d'auteur en action: perspectives internationales sur les recours. Montreal: Les Éditions Themis, pp. 307-318.

Lutkova O.V. (2018) Cross-Border Copyright Relations: Material Law and Conflict-of-Laws Regulation. Doctor of Juridical Sciences Thesis. Moscow, 417 p. (in Russ.)

Majoros F. (1971) Les arrangements bilatéraux en matière de droit d'auteur. Paris: A. Pedone, 130 p.

Marek K., Furrer H.-P., Markin A. (1967) Cour permanente de justice internationale. Répertoire des décisions et des documents de la procédure écrite et orale de la Cour permanente de justice internationale et de la Cour internationale de justice. Série I. Vol. 2 (Les sources du droit international). Genève: Librairie E. Droz, 1288 p.

Niboyet M.-L. (2015) Droit international privé. 5e éd. Issy-les-Moulineaux: LGDJ, 712 p.

Niemann I. (2006) Geistiges Eigentum in konkurrierenden völkerrechtlichen Vertragsordnungen. Das Verhältnis zwischen WIPO und WTO/TRIPS. Berlin: Springer, 492 p.

Olagnier P. (1934) Le droit d'auteur. Tome second. Le droit moderne. Paris: Librairie générale de droit & de jurisprudence, 391 p.

Olian I.A.Jr. (1974) International Copyright and the Needs of Developing Countries: The Awakening at Stockholm and Paris. Cornell International Law Journal, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 81-112.

Ottermann M. (2019) Der Werkschöpfer im Arbeits-und Auftragsverhältnis: Die originäre Inhaberschaft des Urheberrechts unter Berücksichtigung des Urheberpersönlichkeitsrechts und des Urheberkollisionsrechts in Deutschland, England und den Niederlanden. Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlag, 708 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748900061

Püschel H. (ed.) (1980) Urheberrecht Meyers Taschenlexikon. 2. Aufl. Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut, 556 p.

Regelin F.P. (2000) Das Kollisionsrecht der Immaterialgüterrechte an der Schwelle zum 21. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 356 p.

Ricketson S. (2004) The Berne Convention: the continued relevance of an ancient text. In: Vaver/Bently. Intellectual Property in the New Millennium. Essays in Honour of William R. Cornish. Cambridge: University Press, pp. 217-233. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511735042.017

Ricketson S., Ginsburg J. (2005) International Copyright and Neighboring Rights. The Berne Convention and Beyond. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, 1540 p.

Schaafsma S. (2022) Intellectual Property in the Conflict of Laws. The Hidden Conflict-of-law Rule in the Principle of National Treatment. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 608 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839108501.00015

Schack H. (1998) BGH, 2. 10. 1997-I ZR 88/95. Kollisionsrechtliche Probleme im internationalen Filmurheberrecht. Juristen Zeitung, vol. 53, no. 20, pp. 1015-1020.

Schack H. (2019) Urheber — und Urhebervertragsrecht. 9. Aufl. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 766 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1628/978-3-16-157632-4

Stieß K. (2005) Anknüpfungen im internationalen Urheberrecht unter Berücksichtigung der neuen Informationstechnologien. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 301 p.

Troller A. (1952) Das internationale Privat-und Zivilprozessrecht im gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht. Basel: Verlag für Recht und Gesellschaft, 294 p.

Troller A. (1965) Die mehrseitigen völkerrechtlichen Verträge im internationalen gewerblichen Rechtsschutz und Urheberrecht. Basel: Verlag für Recht und Gesellschaft, 226 p.

Ulmer E. (1975) Die Immaterialgüterrechte im internationalen Privatrecht. Berlin: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 124 p.

Villiger M. (2009) Handbuch Internationales Privatrecht mit Hinweisen auf das Internationale Zivilverfahrensrecht. Leiden/Boston: Koninkljke Brill, 522 p.

Von Hein J. et al. (2018) Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch. Band 12. Internationales Privatrecht II (Internationales Wirtschaftsrecht, Art. 50-253 EGBGB). 7. Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 2788 p.

Von Hein J. et al. (2021) Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch. Band 13. Internationales Privatrecht II (Internationales Wirtschaftsrecht, Art. 50-253 EGBGB). 8. Aufl. München: C.H. Beck, 2899 p.