On 8 November 2011, the Court of First Instance of Paris rejected all of Repetto’s claims on the following grounds: Repetto did not demonstrate the “printmark” of the author’s personality -necessary to fulfill the originality requirement and obtain copyright protection-of its shoe models. The simple description based on details was not sufficient to evince its copyrights, and their overall design was borrowed from the “common fund of shoes”. “Le fonds commun” is a sub-category of the public domain referring to anything too general to be protected, such as food recipes, legends and tales, jokes and riddles. However if there is a “transformative element”, this element can be protected under this specific form (see here)
“a shoe-shaped stylized drop of about 1 cm, coated over its entire wafer in the same material as the template, and is reported (not integrated) to the sole of any model in back slightly forward;- A rounded tip slightly oval”
|Richelieu's boots well-hidden|
The Court of Appeal’s holding in its Judgment in September 2013 was as follows “it is clear that the elements which make up the footwear models in question are actually known in their general form, but the Court's assessment must carried out in a comprehensive manner , depending on the overall product appearance by the arrangement of the different elements and not by examining each of them individually , these models clearly fall within existing types of shoes belonging to the common universal fund of footwear as claimed by the defendant ( ... ) if specific combinations thereof, as claimed, are likely to give them its own appearance to distinguish them from other similar models , in the context of a careful examination of the details, no evidence is provided that these very detailed combinations , association of cutting , heels, finishes or curves , and panels system , flanges or shoe assembly known in the field of shoe, even though they highlight an arbitrary choice, are likely to actually translate into an aesthetic position imbued with the personality of the author to fall under the provisions of Book I of the Code of intellectual Property . "
Dancing cats here
Puss in repetto boots Ballet here