Furniture design can enjoy the same protection as a work of art, even without prior registration. Ensuring the transfer of such copyright is essential in order to avoid legal disputes and safeguard the future use of furniture designed ad hoc.
Both the courts and case law have expressly recognized that furniture is protectable by copyright (article 10.1 e) of the Copyright Law). That is, furniture can be protected by copyright as if it were a work of art, regardless of the fact that it is functional.
Moreover, the judgment by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of October 24, 2024 in C-227/23 [Vitra case] confirmed that it was irrelevant that the works had also been registered as an industrial design, since both design rights and copyright could be held simultaneously in these objects.
Copyright protection lasts for 70 years from the death of the author of the design, and during this period the use of replicas of the works in hotels can be blocked.
Specifically, for the design of a piece of furniture to be protected by copyright it simply needs to be original. In other words, it must be the result of the author’s own intellectual creation reflecting his personality, as an expression of his free and creative choices (CJEU judgment of September 12, 2019, C-683/17, Cofemel case). In this regard, the CJEU held that an object is not original, when the realization of the subject matter has been dictated by technical considerations, rules or other constraints, which have left no room for creative freedom. For example, the courts recognized that the “CORSET”, chair designed by Óscar Tusquets (Barcelona Provincial Appellate Court judgment (Panel 15) no. 764/2019 of April 26, 2019, the “LOUIS GHOST” chair by Philip Stark, sold by Kartell (Alicante Provincial Appellate Court judgment – European Union Trademark Court – no. 362/19 of March 18, 2019), and the iconic “TRIPP-TRAPP” chair by Stokke (Madrid Provincial Appellate Court judgment (Panel 13) of May 28, 2003 -JUR/2004/160895- and the Madrid Provincial Appellate Court judgment (Panel 14) no. 793/2004 of November 17, 2004) deserved protection.
Consequently, the harmonized concept of “originality” in the EU, leaves to one side quality or artistic merit and instead focuses on the work as the author’s intellectual creation and an expression of their free and creative choices. The courts have also found that where the author of a design is a recognized artist, it is not even necessary to evidence the artistic value of their work.
In short, when the furniture has been specifically designed for the hotel, it is advisable to expressly obtain the transfer of the copyright and design rights from the author. It might also be wise in this scenario, to expressly include the right to reproduce and modify the design for future additions to or adaptations of the furniture.
When the works have not been conceived ad hoc, it is essential to verify that the furniture is completely original and that it does not constitute a reproduction or modification that has not been authorized by the copyright holder. Such unlawful use could give rise, not just to the removal of the infringing furniture, but also to the obligation to provide compensation for the damages caused.
