Is a Technical Invention Protectable under EU Copyright Law?

摘要

In Lenova Hengelo, the court held that copyrightable subject-matter depends exclusively on two conditions: originality and precise and objective identification. The court rejected copyright protection of a taste because the taste of a food product with the available technical means cannot be pinned down with precision and objectivity. Nevertheless, the decision opens up a potentially very broad range of different types of copyrightable subject-matter. In Cofemel, the court elaborated on the notion of objective identification by stating that an additional requirement of aesthetic effect is incompatible with the concept of a copyrightable work because it relies on the subjective sensation of beauty experienced by each individual. This opinion suggests that "aesthetic effect" ought to be re-introduced in EU copyright law in order to delimit copyrightable subject-matter in the same way as "technical effect" delimits patentable subject-matter in patent law.