Abstract The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Mio/konektra, C-580/23 and C-795/23 marks an important moment in the evolving copyright treatment of works of applied art under European Union law. The contribution examines the implications of the judgment for fashion, this being a sector historically plagued by fragmentation in national copyright approaches. While the decision provides clarification on the assessment of originality and infringement, it also exposes the persistent difficulties inherent in translating a formally harmonized copyright framework into consistent judicial practice. Moving from this, the article discusses how designers and brands are expected to articulate originality and structure infringement claims, in light of the Court’s emphasis on identifiable creative choices and recognizable reproduction. It is ultimately found that, while Mio/konektra consolidates the harmonized framework governing copyright protection for works of applied art, the coherence it seeks to introduce remains dependent on how Member States will operationalize it, through both legislative alignment and judicial practice.
Spyros Sipetas (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: