Contact us

Questions about your strategic brand development? 
Get expert advice from Louis-Philip Cattoir, IP &amp; Brand Strategist at Remarkable Europe.

Let’s talk about your challenge

Neem contact op

Vragen over jouw strategische merkontwikkeling? 
Krijg advies van Louis-Philip Cattoir, IP &amp; Merkstrateeg bij Remarkable Europe.

Laten we jouw uitdaging bespreken

Contact

Schrijf je in voor onze maandelijkse nieuwsbrief!

Thank you!

Bedankt!

Looking for more strategic, creative, and legal brand insights?

Wil je meer strategische, creatieve en juridische merkinzichten ontvangen?

Footer Bottom Menu

Footer Bottom Menu NL

Footer Menu EN

Footer Menu NL

Header Menu EN

Header Menu NL

Last month, there were some interesting developments concerning copyright in the Belgian comic landscape. From the 10th anniversary of the parody exception to comic characters entering the public domain.

<h2>
 An anniversary edition</h2>
Ghent politician Johan Deckmyn was in the spotlight this month, not only because of the elections. September 3 marked the 10-year anniversary of a so-called &#8216;landmark ruling&#8217; by the European Court of Justice, namely Deckmyn v. Vandersteen. It is said that this case set a precedent applicable to all similar cases, particularly regarding the definition of a parody.

The facts
At the New Year&#8217;s reception of Vlaams Belang Ghent in 2011, 2000 calendars were distributed, with a variation on the Spike and Suzy (in dutch: Suske en Wiske) album cover &#8220;De Wilde Weldoener&#8221; (this translates to &#8220;The Wild Benefactor&#8221;) on the cover. Instead of Lambik, Ghent mayor Daniël Termont was depicted as the benefactor, ‘handing out Ghent&#8217;s tax money to non-Ghent residents.&#8217;
&nbsp;

&nbsp;
Since Standaard Uitgeverij (then WPG Publishers) had not given permission, and Willy Vandersteen had stipulated in his will that his comic characters were not to be used for political messages, the publisher and the Vandersteen heirs filed a lawsuit against Johan Deckmyn and the VB support fund Vrijheidsfonds VZW. The publisher and the heirs claimed copyright infringement, which was also discriminatory. However, Deckmyn invoked the parody exception and argued that free speech is not forbidden, even when it ‘offends, shocks, or disturbs.’

&nbsp;
After the Belgian legal proceedings, it was argued that while the parody exception was included in the Infosoc Directive, it had not been defined. The definition was also not explicitly left to the member states. Therefore, the Court of Appeal in Brussels posed the following questions to the European Court of Justice:
<ol>
<li>Is the concept of ‘parody’ an autonomous EU law concept?</li>
<li>If so, must a parody meet certain conditions?</li>
<li>Must a work meet other requirements or characteristics to be considered a parody?</li>
</ol>
On September 3, 2014, the European Court answered these questions as follows: The concept of &#8216;parody&#8217; must be interpreted autonomously and uniformly across the European Union. It must involve an imitation of an existing work, with noticeable differences, and include humor or mockery. This was later clarified in line with the opinion of the Advocate General. The case was then referred back to the Belgian court to judge based on this definition.
As a result, the parody exception has been interpreted broadly to this day.
&nbsp;

Nero enters the public domain From 2025 onwards, those wishing to use Marc Sleen&#8217;s comic characters in their own works will no longer have to rely on the parody exception. The Marc Sleen Foundation has decided to release Nero and his companions into the public domain.
The public domain means that copyright and related rights protection expire. As a result, the works become freely available for use, while the moral rights of the copyright holders remain, as these are inalienable.
We previously wrote a <a href="https://www.remarkable.eu/en/article/mickey-mouse-enters-public-domain">blog</a> about Mickey Mouse&#8217;s upcoming entry into the public domain, which is a good example of how copyrights expire over time.

<h2>
 </h2>
Nero and Co: Free to use, but not without rules &nbsp;
Since copyright lasts 70 years after the author&#8217;s death, Marc Sleen&#8217;s characters, who passed away in 2016, would still be protected until 2086. However, the Marc Sleen Foundation, which manages these rights, has decided to relinquish some of these rights starting in 2025, with full release by 2030.
Specifically, from 2025, the comic characters can be used without prior permission. However, for commercial purposes and new editions, permission from the Foundation is still required until January 1, 2030. Additionally, commercial use must align with the tone of the original stories. Organizations of a political or ideological nature are excluded from use, so if a situation like the Deckmyn case arises, the parody exception can still be invoked.

Trademark law still protects Nero’s name
Although Marc Sleen&#8217;s comic characters will soon fall into the public domain, the name &#8216;Nero&#8217; remains protected as a trademark. This trademark registration still gives the exclusive right to use the name for things like printed matter and publishing services. A trademark registration does not expire and can be renewed indefinitely every 10 years.
Remarkable, on behalf of Standaard Uitgeverij, oversees this trademark registration, along with other registered comic characters. Although the publisher respects the Foundation’s wishes and will not enforce the exclusive right to the name, trademark law can still act as a safety net for copyright issues.
Do you have questions about your brand registrations? Feel free to <a href="https://www.remarkable.eu/en/contact">contact </a>us, and our experts will be happy to assist you.

Drawn into IP: