Bielorrusia / Casos nacionales

Photographer v periodical publisher — four documentary photographs

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
Photographer v periodical publisher — four documentary photographs
Cita
Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus, decision of 15 October 2009
Tribunal
Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus, Judicial Collegium for Intellectual Property Matters
Instancia
national supreme court exercising first-instance copyright jurisdiction
Fechas
Decisión
2009-10-15
Estado
resolved-protectability-recognized
Resultado
Protectability recognized; the exact final monetary or injunctive remedy is not reconstructed in the accessible source.
Resumen
Yes. The accepted repeat examination identified creative novelty, originality, uniqueness and individuality in composition, unusual viewpoints, light and shade, and emotional effect.
Antecedentes
Four documentary photographs were used in a periodical. Protectability turned on whether the images reflected creative choices despite their documentary character.
Historia procesal
The court considered an initial expert assessment and a repeat forensic art examination dated 20 August 2009. It criticized the first opinion as contradictory and accepted the repeat opinion.
Cuestión jurídica
Whether documentary photographs used in a periodical possessed sufficient creative character for copyright protection.
Criterio
Yes. The accepted repeat examination identified creative novelty, originality, uniqueness and individuality in composition, unusual viewpoints, light and shade, and emotional effect.
Fundamento decisivo
Documentary subject matter and camera technology do not eliminate copyright when the claimant proves individualized expressive decisions in composition, viewpoint and visual treatment.
Límites
No AI. The case is expert-dependent, predates the 2011 Copyright Law and the 2024 creativity presumption, and the complete official decision was not retrievable cross-border.
Relevancia
doctrina-general
Referencias relacionadas
    Peso del precedente
    Historical authoritative Supreme Court application; nonbinding precedent and source-limited. Integración/votación: Court composition and judge name not disclosed in the accessible reconstruction. No dissent or separate opinion reported; exact composition unavailable.
    Fuente
    Referencia
    Photographer v periodical publisher — four documentary photographs
    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_identity_with_scholarly_reconstruction
    Localizador
    Ivanova 2024, p. 95 and reference 6; preserved extraction lines 205-232 and 383-386
    Verificación documentada
    Fuente de contraste
    Consultar fuente
    Volver a Bielorrusia