Judgment of the Court of Justice of 24 October 2024, Kwantum (C-227/23)
1. Facts
The Swiss furniture manufacturer Vitra owns the intellectual property rights to furniture designs created by Charles and Ray Eames (American citizens), including the "DSW chair." Vitra is suing the Dutch and Belgian retail chain Kwantum for selling a chair that it believes infringes its intellectual property rights to the "DSW chair."
Example of a DSW chair. Source: Vitra
The main litigation reaches the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, which decides to suspend the proceedings and refer a preliminary question to the CJEU in order to clarify the validity of the aforementioned copyright in the EU, given that the original work and its authors are from the United States (third country).
The legal debate centered on determining whether EU regulations, specifically the 2001 / 29 / CE Directive It should apply to works of applied art from third countries and whether EU Member States can require, as a condition, the criterion of “material reciprocity” provided for in Article 2.7 of Bern Convention to recognize copyright in those cases.
2. Pronouncements
The Court of Justice declares that the situation described falls within the material scope of Directive 2001/29/EC. In other words, the exclusive rights established by that Directive can be extended to works originating from third countries, provided that those works meet the requirements of originality to be classified as a “work”.
Consequently, the CJEU interprets the copyright enshrined in the Directive, in conjunction with the fundamental rights recognized in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as precluding Member States from making the exercise of those rights subject to the principle of “material reciprocity” provided for in the Berne Convention (i.e., they cannot require that the work be “equally protected” in its country of origin). Such a limitation, if imposed, would have to come from an explicit EU provision.
3. Comment
This ruling marks a milestone in the protection of design creations and works of applied art within the EU internal market when they originate from third countries. It prevents Member States from unilaterally imposing additional requirements (such as “material reciprocity”) that could fragment the internal market and weaken the protection of authors.
In practice, it strengthens legal certainty for foreign (non-European) copyright holders by ensuring they can invoke the Directive's protection in any Member State, without discrimination. Furthermore, it prevents the principle of reciprocity from serving as a technical or formal barrier to the effective circulation of protected works. Ultimately, it reinforces the coherence of the harmonized copyright regime in the EU.
Maria Cadarso, Senior Associate in the Legal area.
