---

630      (13 Nov. 1814)                  JURISPRUDENCE OF THE COURT OF CASSATION                  (17 Nov. 1814)
______________________________

[3rd column:]

COUNTERFEIT – SCULPTURE – DEPOSIT
BY LAW.

The counterfeiting of a work of sculpture is
      an offence like the illegal copying of a text or
      an engraving. (Code pénal, 425.) (3)
The author of a work of sculpture is not
      subject to the requirement to deposit two copies
________

(3) This question arises from the silence or obscurity of the law with
regard to works of sculpture. Neither the law of 19 July 1793, nor the
Code pénal explicitly mention such productions: the
law of 1793, in its art. 7, merely speaks of property in productions
of the mind or of genius within the domain of the fine arts, and the
Code pénal, in its art. 427, which punishes counterfeiting,
limits itself to including in the things which are to be confiscated
according to the penalty decreed, the moulds or dies of the
counterfeited objects. – All the same, these statements do not allow
one to doubt that the legislator also intended to protect, against
counterfeiting, works of sculpture, which, with as much right as the works
of literature, painting, engraving, and music – which are named
specifically – ought to figure amongst the productions of the mind
and of genius.
      In this respect, the old regulations had taken care of what was
necessary for placing the works of sculpture under protection from
plagiarism and counterfeiting. For example, one could cite a
sentence de police of 11 July 1702, which prohibits
founders, on pain of a fine of 500 livres, from counter-casting
[contremouler] or giving to other people the works which they
have been given to found by sculptors, and which also prohibits
sculptors from sharing with anyone else the models which they
have made for the founders or which the founders have
communicated to them; – The new