Judgment of the Court of Justice of October 24, 2024, Kwantum (C-227/23)
1. Facts
The Swiss furniture manufacturer Vitra holds the intellectual property rights to furniture designs created by Charles and Ray Eames (U.S. citizens), including, among others, the “DSW chair.” Vitra is suing the Dutch and Belgian retail chain Kwantum for selling a chair that it claims infringes on its intellectual property rights to the “DSW chair.”
Example of a DSW chair. Source: Vitra
The main case was brought before the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, which decided to stay the proceedings and refer a question for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU in order to clarify the validity of the aforementioned copyrights in the EU, given that the original work and its authors are from the United States (a third country).
The legal debate centered on determining whether EU legislation—specifically, Directive 2001/29/EC —should apply to works of applied art from third countries, and whether EU Member States may require, as a condition, the criterion of “substantive reciprocity” provided for in Article 2(7) of the Berne Convention in order to recognize copyright in such cases.
2. Statements
The Court of Justice holds that the situation described falls within the material scope of Directive 2001/29/EC. In other words, the exclusive rights established by that directive may extend to works originating in third countries, provided that such works meet the originality requirements to be classified as “works.”
Consequently, the CJEU interprets that the copyright protections enshrined in the Directive, in relation to the fundamental rights recognized in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, preclude Member States from making the exercise of those rights contingent on the criterion of “substantive reciprocity” provided for in the Berne Convention (that is, they may not require that the work be “equally protected” in its country of origin). Such a limitation, if imposed, would have to stem from an express EU provision.
3. Comment
This ruling marks a milestone in the protection of design creations and works of applied art in the EU’s internal market when they originate from third countries. It prevents Member States from unilaterally imposing additional requirements (such as “substantive reciprocity”) that could fragment the internal market and weaken the protection afforded to creators.
In practice, it strengthens legal certainty for foreign (non-European) copyright holders by ensuring that they can invoke the protection of the Directive in any Member State, without discrimination. Furthermore, it prevents the reciprocity criterion from serving as a technical or formal barrier to the effective circulation of protected works. Ultimately, it strengthens the coherence of the harmonized copyright regime in the EU.
María Cadarso, Senior Associate in the Legal Department.