This led to the request for a preliminary ruling by the CJ in the Cofemel Case. The Portuguese Supreme Court decided to stay the proceedings and refer two questions to the CJ for a preliminary ruling.46 With the first question, the STJ wanted to know if the interpretation by the CJ of Article 2 (a) of Directive 2001/2947 precluded national legislation -in the case, the provision in Article 2 (1) (i) of CDADC-which confers copyright protection on works of applied art, industrial designs and works of design which, over and above their practical purpose, create their own visual and distinctive effect from an aesthetic point of view, being their originality the fundamental criterion that grants the protection in the area of copyright. With the second question, the STJ wanted to know if the interpretation by the CJ of Article 2 (a) of Directive 2001/29 precludes national legislation – in the case, the provision in Article 2 (1) (i) of CDADC- that confers copyright protection on works of applied art, industrial designs and works of design if, in light of a particularly rigorous assessment of their artistic value and taking Morgado); (4) Court of Appeal of Porto, in 2018, considered that it would be inappropriate to classify a line of garden furniture as an artistic creation [Decision of 25 October 2018 (Proc 364/12.3TVPRT, dgsi. pt)]; (5) Court of Appeal of Lisbon, in 2018, refused to protect paper bins, garden benches, and concrete planters as copyrighted works. They were considered objects of urban furniture, of an industrial nature, with a merely functional design. Thus, they could not be considered artistic creations [Decision of 9 January 2018 (Proc 76/14.3YHLSB, dgsi.pt), confirmed by the STJ decision of 27 September 2018 (dgsi.pt)]; (6) Court of Appeal of Lisbon, in 2018, considered that the design of light fittings by architect Souto de Moura deserved protection by copyright [Decision of 10 April 2018 (Proc 225/13/13.9YHLSB.L1-7, dgsi.pt)]. On the same grounds, the STJ confirmed this decision without waiting for the results of the CJEU’s preliminary ruling on the Cofemel case. 46 The Cofemel case has been the subject of extensive analysis by national and international scholarship. Besides the Portuguese scholars already mentioned, see CARBAJO CASCÓN, Fernando, “Objetos Industriales, Derecho de Autor y Libre Competencia, Consideraciones a partir de las SSTJEU de 12 de Septiembre de 2019 (“Cofemel”) y 11 de Junio de 2020 (“Brompton”)”, Cuadernos de Derecho Transnacional, 2020, 12 (2) p. 913; CARBAJO CASCÓN, Fernando, “La protección de los diseños de moda en la Unión Europea (entre el diseño industrial y el derecho de autor)”, Cuadernos del Centro de Estudios de Diseño y Comunicación, 2020, 106, pp. 139–162; ENDRICH-LAIMBÖCK, Tobias, “Little Guidance for the Application of Copyright Law to Designs in Cofemel”GRUR-International, 2020, 69 (3), pp. 264-269; GÜVEN, Korey, “Eliminating “Aesthetics” from Copyright Law: The Aftermath of Cofemel’ GRUR-International, 2022, 71(3), pp 213225; KUR, Annette, “Unité de l’Art Is Here to Stay- Cofemel and its Consequences”, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition Research Paper, December 2019, nº 19-16, pp. 1-22; LEISTNER, Matthias, “Einheitlicher europäischer Werkbegriff auch im Bereich der angewandten Kunst - Warum sich für die deutsche Praxis dennoch nicht viel ändern sollte”, GRUR, 11, 2019, pp. 1114-1119; ROSATI, Eleonora, “CJEU Rules that Copyright Protection for Designs Only Requires Sufficient Originality”, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Vol. 14, (12), December 2019, pp. 931–932; RENDAS, Tito, “Copyright Protection of Designs in the EU: How Many Originality Standards Is Too Many?” Journal of Intellectual Law & Practice, Vol. 13(6), 2018, June 2018, pp. 439-441. 47 Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society [2001] OJ L167, 9 (already mentioned above as InfoSoc Directive). 237 HOW TO PROTECT FOOD PRESENTATION BY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==