Bielorrusia / Casos nacionales
Shop design project — technical implementation rather than creative work
Casos nacionales. La inclusión en esta ficha no convierte una referencia extranjera en una decisión nacional. Se conserva el estado y el alcance de la fuente.
Expediente y fuentes
- Nombre
- Shop design project — technical implementation rather than creative work
- Cita
- Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus, decision of 23 September 2020, Etalon regnum s920h0016s
- Tribunal
- Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus, Judicial Collegium for Intellectual Property Matters
- Instancia
- national supreme court exercising exclusive first-instance copyright jurisdiction
- Fechas
- Decisión
- 2020-09-23
- Estado
- resolved-claim-denied
- Resultado
- Copyright compensation claim denied.
- Resumen
- No. The project was technical work carried out to the defendant's requirements and vision and lacked the creative qualities the court required; the copyright claim failed.
- Antecedentes
- The claimant prepared a retail-store design project to the defendant's requirements and vision, using solutions and elements common to that kind of shop. The claimant later alleged unauthorized use.
- Historia procesal
- The copyright compensation claim was heard by the Supreme Court's IP collegium. The official Etalon identifier was verified; the operative factual reconstruction is preserved in a peer-reviewed comparative analysis.
- Cuestión jurídica
- Whether a shop design project implementing the client's requirements with commonplace solutions was a creative work protected by copyright.
- Criterio
- No. The project was technical work carried out to the defendant's requirements and vision and lacked the creative qualities the court required; the copyright claim failed.
- Fundamento decisivo
- A human-made output is not automatically a work merely because effort, skill or design software was used. The court distinguished technical execution and commonplace solutions from protected creative activity.
- Límites
- No AI holding. The court's historical vocabulary of novelty, originality, uniqueness and memorability predates the 2024 statutory creativity presumption and should not be converted into a fixed modern multi-factor test.
- Relevancia
- doctrina-general
- Referencias relacionadas
- Peso del precedente
- Authoritative national Supreme Court first-instance application; nonbinding precedent, highly relevant by analogy to technical versus creative contribution. Integración/votación: Single-judge copyright disposition; judge name not disclosed in the accessible source. Single-judge disposition; no vote applicable.
- Fuente
- Referencia
- Shop design project — technical implementation rather than creative work
- Enlace
- Consultar fuente
- Autoridad
- Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus, Judicial Collegium for Intellectual Property Matters
- Tipo
- doctrina-general
- Tipo de evidencia
- primary_judicial_identifier_with_peer_reviewed_reconstruction
- Localizador
- Bogustov 2022, pp. 88-89, footnote 6; preserved extraction lines 6000-6048
- Verificación documentada
- Sí
- Fuente de contraste
- Consultar fuente