Browse Documents By...
Original Language...
Documents For...
Browse Commentaries By...
Browse Referred Persons By...
Court of Cassation on moral rights, Paris (1902)
Source: Bibliothèque universitaire de Poitiers (SCD) : Dalloz, Jurisprudence générale. Recueil Périodique et critique de jurisprudence, de legislation et de doctrine, 1903.1.5
Citation:
Court of Cassation on moral rights, Paris (1902), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org
Back | Record | Images | Commentaries: [1]
Record-ID: f_1902
Permanent link: https://copyrighthistory.org/cam/tools/request/showRecord.php?id=record_f_1902
Full title:
Cinquin v. Lecocq, Court of Cassation. 25 June 1902.
Full title original language:
Cinquin C. Lecocq, Cour de Cassation. Du 25 juin 1902.
Abstract:
The Lecocq case of 1902, that is just a few years after divorce was legalized again in France (in 1884), raised the question as to whether copyright formed part of the joint estate that might have to be divided between the husband and wife on their separation. Did literary property entail no more than the right to exploit a work commercially? Should this exclusive property right be included in the total estate to be divided where a regime of community of acquests had been agreed on in the contract of marriage? This question would, in accordance with earlier judicial decisions, be answered affirmatively by the Court of Cassation: thus, it seemed that the object of literary property was comparable to all other goods and assets. But on the other hand, the supreme judges asserted that the inclusion of the author's right of exploitation in the joint estate to be divided, and in a wider sense any transfer of the right of literary property at all, must not, though, lead to the author losing the right - a right which was 'inherent in his very personality' - to control the integrity of his work. The Court of Cassation had therefore confirmed the author's moral right to his work, in a context where the definition of this right as such in terms of property was being called into question. Interpreted by some authors as the result of the jurisprudential vacillations of the time, and even as typical of a 'patchwork' of judicial decisions which emanated from fashionable contemporary doctrines about authorial subjectivity, the Court of Cassation's ruling in the Lecocq case nevertheless heralded the emergence of moral rights and of the 'dualist' conception of the author's right.
1 Commentary:
commentary_f_1902
Bibliography:
N/A
Related documents in this database:
1828: Court of Appeal on moral rights
1845: Court of Appeal on right of publication
1867: Cour de Cassation on moral rights
Author: N/A
Publisher: Dalloz
Year: 1902
Location: Paris
Language: French
Source: Bibliothèque universitaire de Poitiers (SCD) : Dalloz, Jurisprudence générale. Recueil Périodique et critique de jurisprudence, de legislation et de doctrine, 1903.1.5
Persons referred to:
Aubry, Charles
Ballot-Beaupré, Marie Clément Jules Alexis
Baudouin, Manuel Achille
Baudry-Lacantiniere, Gabriel
Beaumarchais, Pierre Augustin Caron de
Blanc, Etienne
Boivin-Champeaux, Paul
Bozérian, Jules-François Jeannotte
Chamfort, Nicolas Sébastien Roch
Cinquin, Mlle
Couhin, Claude Raoul
Dalloz, Désiré
Delisle, G.
Demolombe, Jean Charles Florent
Ducis, Jean François
Dupin, André Marie Jean Jacques
Dutruc, Gustave
Forichon, Emile
Gastambide, Adrien-Joseph
Guillouard, Louis Vincent
La Harpe, Jean François de
Lakanal, Joseph
Laurent, François
Lecocq, Alexandre Charles
Lemierre, Antoine-Marin
Locré, Jean-Guillaume, Baron de
Mailher de Chassat, Antoine
Marcadé, Victor-Napoléon
Merlin, Philippe-Antoine
Mollot, M.
Morillot, André
Napoleon I
Olin, Xavier Victor
Parant, Narcisse
Pataille, Jules-Henri-Paul
Picard, Edmond
Planiol, Marcel Ferdinand
Pont, Paul
Portalis, Joseph Marie Portalis, 1st Count
Pouillet, Eugène
Rau, Charles-Frédéric
Regnaud de Saint-Jean d'Angély, Count Michel-Louis-Etienne
Renouard, Augustin-Charles
Rodière, Aimé-Bernard-Yves-Honoré
Ruben de Couder, Joseph
Saleilles, Raymond
Taulier, Frédéric Marc Joseph
Troplong, Raymond-Théodore
Places referred to:
Agen (Aquitaine)
Dijon
France
Lyon
Metz
Nancy
Paris
Rouen
Cases referred to:
Cinquin v. Lecocq (Ct of Cass., 1902)
Institutions referred to:
Chamber of Deputies, Paris
Corps législatif (1852-1870)
Council of State (France)
Court of Appeal (Paris)
Court of Cassation (Paris)
National Assembly (1789-1791)
Tribunal correctionnel de la Seine
Legislation:
Code Pénal 1810
Code civil (Napoleonic code) 1804
Franco-Bavarian Copyright Treaty 1865
French Constitution of 1852
French Copyright Act 1793
French Copyright Act 1895
French Imperial decree on the book trade 1810
French Literary and Artistic Property Act 1854
French Literary and Artistic Property Act 1866
French law of 13 January 1791, concerning the works of living playwrights
French law of 19 January 1791, declaring the liberty of the theatres
Keywords:
authorship, romantic concept of
divisibility
duration
formalities
inheritability
moral rights, integrity
moral rights, theory
music, protected subject matter
personality theory
property theory
property theory, authors' property
public performance
transferability
Responsible editor: Frédéric Rideau
Source: Bibliothèque universitaire de Poitiers (SCD) : Dalloz, Jurisprudence générale. Recueil Périodique et critique de jurisprudence, de legislation et de doctrine, 1903.1.5
Citation:
Court of Cassation on moral rights, Paris (1902), Primary Sources on Copyright (1450-1900), eds L. Bently & M. Kretschmer, www.copyrighthistory.org
Back | Record | Images | Commentaries: [1]
Record-ID: f_1902
Permanent link: https://copyrighthistory.org/cam/tools/request/showRecord.php?id=record_f_1902
Full title:
Cinquin v. Lecocq, Court of Cassation. 25 June 1902.
Full title original language:
Cinquin C. Lecocq, Cour de Cassation. Du 25 juin 1902.
Abstract:
The Lecocq case of 1902, that is just a few years after divorce was legalized again in France (in 1884), raised the question as to whether copyright formed part of the joint estate that might have to be divided between the husband and wife on their separation. Did literary property entail no more than the right to exploit a work commercially? Should this exclusive property right be included in the total estate to be divided where a regime of community of acquests had been agreed on in the contract of marriage? This question would, in accordance with earlier judicial decisions, be answered affirmatively by the Court of Cassation: thus, it seemed that the object of literary property was comparable to all other goods and assets. But on the other hand, the supreme judges asserted that the inclusion of the author's right of exploitation in the joint estate to be divided, and in a wider sense any transfer of the right of literary property at all, must not, though, lead to the author losing the right - a right which was 'inherent in his very personality' - to control the integrity of his work. The Court of Cassation had therefore confirmed the author's moral right to his work, in a context where the definition of this right as such in terms of property was being called into question. Interpreted by some authors as the result of the jurisprudential vacillations of the time, and even as typical of a 'patchwork' of judicial decisions which emanated from fashionable contemporary doctrines about authorial subjectivity, the Court of Cassation's ruling in the Lecocq case nevertheless heralded the emergence of moral rights and of the 'dualist' conception of the author's right.
1 Commentary:
commentary_f_1902
Bibliography:
N/A
Related documents in this database:
1828: Court of Appeal on moral rights
1845: Court of Appeal on right of publication
1867: Cour de Cassation on moral rights
Author: N/A
Publisher: Dalloz
Year: 1902
Location: Paris
Language: French
Source: Bibliothèque universitaire de Poitiers (SCD) : Dalloz, Jurisprudence générale. Recueil Périodique et critique de jurisprudence, de legislation et de doctrine, 1903.1.5
Persons referred to:
Aubry, Charles
Ballot-Beaupré, Marie Clément Jules Alexis
Baudouin, Manuel Achille
Baudry-Lacantiniere, Gabriel
Beaumarchais, Pierre Augustin Caron de
Blanc, Etienne
Boivin-Champeaux, Paul
Bozérian, Jules-François Jeannotte
Chamfort, Nicolas Sébastien Roch
Cinquin, Mlle
Couhin, Claude Raoul
Dalloz, Désiré
Delisle, G.
Demolombe, Jean Charles Florent
Ducis, Jean François
Dupin, André Marie Jean Jacques
Dutruc, Gustave
Forichon, Emile
Gastambide, Adrien-Joseph
Guillouard, Louis Vincent
La Harpe, Jean François de
Lakanal, Joseph
Laurent, François
Lecocq, Alexandre Charles
Lemierre, Antoine-Marin
Locré, Jean-Guillaume, Baron de
Mailher de Chassat, Antoine
Marcadé, Victor-Napoléon
Merlin, Philippe-Antoine
Mollot, M.
Morillot, André
Napoleon I
Olin, Xavier Victor
Parant, Narcisse
Pataille, Jules-Henri-Paul
Picard, Edmond
Planiol, Marcel Ferdinand
Pont, Paul
Portalis, Joseph Marie Portalis, 1st Count
Pouillet, Eugène
Rau, Charles-Frédéric
Regnaud de Saint-Jean d'Angély, Count Michel-Louis-Etienne
Renouard, Augustin-Charles
Rodière, Aimé-Bernard-Yves-Honoré
Ruben de Couder, Joseph
Saleilles, Raymond
Taulier, Frédéric Marc Joseph
Troplong, Raymond-Théodore
Places referred to:
Agen (Aquitaine)
Dijon
France
Lyon
Metz
Nancy
Paris
Rouen
Cases referred to:
Cinquin v. Lecocq (Ct of Cass., 1902)
Institutions referred to:
Chamber of Deputies, Paris
Corps législatif (1852-1870)
Council of State (France)
Court of Appeal (Paris)
Court of Cassation (Paris)
National Assembly (1789-1791)
Tribunal correctionnel de la Seine
Legislation:
Code Pénal 1810
Code civil (Napoleonic code) 1804
Franco-Bavarian Copyright Treaty 1865
French Constitution of 1852
French Copyright Act 1793
French Copyright Act 1895
French Imperial decree on the book trade 1810
French Literary and Artistic Property Act 1854
French Literary and Artistic Property Act 1866
French law of 13 January 1791, concerning the works of living playwrights
French law of 19 January 1791, declaring the liberty of the theatres
Keywords:
authorship, romantic concept of
divisibility
duration
formalities
inheritability
moral rights, integrity
moral rights, theory
music, protected subject matter
personality theory
property theory
property theory, authors' property
public performance
transferability
Responsible editor: Frédéric Rideau