A work of art begins to live its own life after its publication. It can form the basis for the works of other authors. Parodies are a vivid example of this. But how original are such “derivative” creations? Are they copyright violations? Such issues may well become a reason for legal proceedings, and there are some examples of that.

“Moulinsart SA”, a Belgian company, filed two lawsuits against French sculptors who used the image of the character “Tintin” without its consent.

The first trial took place in the French city of Marseille. The defendant was the sculptor Christophe Tixier. The dispute concerned busts that reproduced some of the body positions of “Tintin”.

The defendant’s objection was that “Tintin” is not copyrighted because it is based on the character “Tintin-Lutin” invented in 1898 by illustrator Benjamin Rabier. “The plaintiff, strictly speaking, is not himself the creator of Tintin!” - Christophe Tixier’s attorney-at-law exclaimed.

A representative of Moulinsart SA claimed that his opponent was confusing the originality with the novelty.

The court found that the authentic work was original, and the sculptures by Crostophe Tixier reproducing the character of “Tintin” were copyright violations. As a result, the court satisfied the claim and ordered the sculptor to pay more than one hundred thousand euros in compensation. In addition, the court banned Christophe Tessier from selling the sculptures.

The other trial took place in the French city of Renn. The plaintiff was still the company Moulinsart SA. The defendant was Xavier Marabu who used the images of the characters “Tintin” and “Edward Hooper” in his works.

This time it was the defendant to win. The court ruled: if a work is used for humorous purposes, then author’s consent is not required.

The conclusions of the French courts give reason for reflection. Indeed, the main feature of any parody is humor. It is thanks to humor that a parody can claim originality, which is so important for legal protection.

But something else is also obvious. It happens that copyright holders of works of art have a negative attitude towards parodies, considering them an infringement of their intellectual property rights. These risks are to be taken into account by parodists.