EpMadrid Updated: Save Send news by email electrónicoTu name *
Your email *
Your email *
The Supreme Court (TS) has been established that the job of a bullfighter is not a work that can be registered as a intellectual property “to not be able to express themselves in an objective way what what would be the artistic creation”, on the sidelines of the feeling that you can build “by the beauty of the forms generated in this dramatic context”.
The Civil division has dismissed the appeal filed by the bullfighter Miguel Ángel Perera against the judgment of the Audiencia Provincial de Badajoz, which confirmed another of the Court of the Commercial Number 1 of Badajoz in which upheld the decision of the registrar of the territory of the intellectual property of Extremadura not allow the registration of the job in question.
“it Is very difficult to identify objectively what would be the creation of artistic original to the object of the recognized rights of the exclusive own of a piece of intellectual property”
The intention of Perera was registered as intellectual property in a work entitled ‘Site of the two ears with the request of the tail to the bull Curious’, , which took place on June 22, 2014 at the Fair of San Juan de Badajoz, and to have consisted of “left hand to a natural changing of the hand at the back and gives pass on the right. The bull comes loose, and the matador goes to him giving overlook on the right.” To do this, provided an audiovisual recording and a book descriptive.
The bullfighter, as has been recalled by the Supreme court, he cited that the “ bullfighting is an art and the site of a bullfighter an art, a work of art, and, in particular, which was the subject of an application for registration of intellectual property was a creation of artistic original, the reason for which it was from your registration” in the same.
own intellectual Creation
The judges have explained in its ruling that in order for a work to be considered to be the intellectual property must attend two elements add up: “there Must be a original that constitutes a own intellectual creation of its author, and the consideration of work is reserved for the elements that express the intellectual creation”.
So, have pointed out that, “without a loss of considered artistic that may be the site of a bullfighter by critics and fans, and of feelings that can generate in those who witness it, as reflected in the work of some famous poets (…) and painters (…), so that may be protected as a work of intellectual property, in consideration of the purpose of this protection, must meet the requirements of the work already mentioned”.
The Hall I has reasoned that “the creating intellectual l attributable to the bullfighter, his creative talent, staff, would be in the interpretation of the bull that has been the luck”, although “this creation would have to be reflected in a formal expression original, which in this case could prove to be the sequence of movements”, and that in addition to “you should be able to be identified with precision and objectivity.”
In his opinion, “it is here (…) is the main stumbling block so that it can recognize the lidia del toro consideration of the work object of intellectual property” because you should “be expressed in the form of objective for those who have to ensure the protection of exclusive rights inherent to copyright, as individuals, may be in a position to know with clarity and precision the protected object”.
“In bullfighting, a bull is not possible that identification, the not being able to express yourself in an objective way what what would be the artistic creation of the matador to perform a specific task, beyond the feeling that it conveys to those who attend, by the beauty of the forms generated in this dramatic context. For this reason, it is to recognise the consideration of the work object of intellectual property”, has concluded the TS.
To strengthen its ruling, the Supreme court has tried to equate the fighting of a bull to a choreography, since these are considered to be works protected by intellectual property regulations. In this sense, has clarified that “in the choreography is possible, with notation , identified with precision and objectivity movements and forms of the dance in what is the original creation of the author in respect of which calls for the protection work of intellectual property.”
“This identification is accurate and objective, in addition to facilitating that can be played back, allows you to identify what is the creation, both to third persons as to the authorities responsible for the protection of works of intellectual property,” he underlined.
however, has emphasized, “the same does not occur at the site of a bullfighter, in the beyond of the concrete passes, hauls and lots , in respect of which there is no claim to the sole, it is very difficult to identify objectively what would be the creation of artistic original to the object of the recognized rights of the exclusive own of a piece of intellectual property.”
See the comments