In the field of contemporary design, and especially in yacht design, renderings play a key role in the representation and enhancement of projects.
By “rendering” is meant that process which makes it possible to create a digital output, in the form of an image or animation, through the use of specialized software and on the basis of technical and design information.
From a legal perspective, Italian case law qualifies renderings, where the requirements of creativity and originality are met, as works of figurative art protected under the Italian Copyright Law (Law No. 633/1941, “LDI”).
A particularly sensitive issue concerns the ownership of intellectual property rights when such works are created on commission. On this point, the Court of Florence, with judgment No. 935 of 27 March 2023, has provided clarifications of particular practical relevance.
The case at hand involved two companies: on the one hand, Company X, acting as the commissioning party, which had entrusted Company Y with the creation of renderings intended for the promotion of its products, providing the necessary data, materials and information; on the other hand, Company Y, which executed the renderings.
Subsequently, Company X became aware that the renderings created on its behalf had been published on Company Y’s website, together with other works. Company X therefore brought legal action seeking a declaration of infringement of its copyright and an injunction against the unauthorized use, as well as the removal of the content.
The Court of Florence reaffirmed a fundamental principle regarding works created on commission: in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, the economic exploitation rights belong entirely to the commissioning party.
Pursuant to Article 12 LDI, the holder of the economic exploitation rights has the exclusive right to publish the work, to use it in any form and to prevent third parties from doing so. Such rights include, inter alia, the right of reproduction and the right of communication to the public, which also includes making the work available online.
In the case at hand, the Court held that such rights belonged exclusively to Company X, which had never authorized the publication of the renderings. Nor could such authorization be inferred implicitly.
It follows that the publication of the renderings by Company Y that had created them on its own website, carried out for promotional purposes, constitutes an infringement of the economic copyright of the commissioning party.
The decision also addresses the issue of moral rights. Indeed, Company Y argued that Company X had infringed its right of authorship of the work by publishing the renderings without indicating the author. In the specific case, the Court recognized that Company Y held the moral right of authorship, since the renderings displayed a creative and original contribution. However, the Court clarified that such recognition does not affect the ownership of the economic rights, which remain with the commissioning party. Furthermore, referring to the prevailing case law, the Court held that the mere omission of the author’s name on the renderings does not, in itself, constitute a violation of the moral right, unless it is accompanied by a false attribution of the work to third parties (so-called misattribution of authorship). In this respect, the Court also highlighted a particularly relevant practical aspect: in the field of renderings, it is common practice not to indicate the author’s name, for aesthetic and communicative reasons. Such practice affects the manner in which moral rights are exercised, which must adapt to the forms of use of the work.
In light of the above, the Court of Florence found that there had been an infringement of the economic copyright held by the commissioning party and ordered Company Y to cease any use of the renderings and to remove them from any channel, including websites, social media and promotional materials.
The decision confirms principles of significant practical relevance:
- in works made on commission, the commissioning party automatically acquires the economic exploitation rights in the work(in this case the renderings), without the need for a written assignment, unless otherwise agreed by the parties;
- even where the party executing the renderings holds moral rights (where the requirements of creativity and originality under the law are met), it may not publish the renderings without the authorization of the commissioning party and does not have an automatic right to have its name indicated as author, in the absence of misattribution of authorship.