Many EU Member States have a well-established approach with regard to
the use of copyright-protected works for the purpose of parody. As a consequence of
the CJEU’s Deckmyn decision, in which the Court held that parody is an autonomous
concept of EU law and defined that concept, their approach may need to
change. This article looks at the criteria developed by various national courts to
determine the lawfulness of parodies prior to Deckmyn and at the role these criteria
can play after Deckmyn. It will be argued that even though the adaptation right is not
explicitly harmonized by the InfoSoc Directive, a parody will in principle constitute
a reproduction within the meaning of that directive. In addition, it is submitted that
Member States are not free to restrict the scope of the harmonized parody exception
by imposing requirements not found in the InfoSoc Directive. Consequently, there is
very little margin of discretion left for Member States with regard to the legal
treatment of parodies. Nevertheless, most of the ‘‘old’’ criteria can still play a role
when determining a fair balance of rights and interests that, according to the CJEU,
needs to be maintained when applying the exception. When taking account of the
essential characteristics of a parody, as defined by the CJEU, and the fair balance in
an overall assessment, the parody exception can act as a flexible exception, allowing
a wide array of humorous and critical uses of copyright-protected works.

T00000000006BK

Available

• Parody After Deckmyn – A Comparative Overview of the Approach to Parody Under Copyright Law in Belgium, France, Germany and The Netherlands