Download the court ruling

For these cards of EuropaCorp and Gaumont content, Eric Zemmour excerpts only “ Short quotes justified by the informative nature of the video “.

According to the candidate, it will create a new creation in his campaign clip. Except, “ Banning fiction from being linked to political discourse would create an attack on freedom of expression in violation of the European Convention for the Defense of Human Rights. “.

Short quotes are no exception

A little quote? The exception provided by the Intellectual Property Code allows the use of abstract text, but “ The name and source of the author are clearly stated “.

The problem is, at the date of the discovery, these notes were missing or incomplete. “ According to the official statement prepared by the defendants themselves and drawn up on January 25, 2022, only the title of the film and the name of the owner of the YouTube channel are mentioned, not the names of the holders of the rights “. Machine Conclusion: Eric Gemmour cannot claim the benefit of this exception to the monopoly.

Another concern is that juices can only be used “ Information about criticism, discussion, education, science or the work to which they are attached “. However, passages taken by Jemmur.” There are only simple examples of visual background for speech that does not maintain any “dialogue” with the text of the questionable works not introduced here to clarify a subject or to deepen an analysis. “.

These areas So by no means do they want to convey that I recommend for the mother to be inactive »:

“ In order to use the information data as maintained by the defendants, the information provided must be relevant to the works from which the controversial extracts were taken, although this information is exclusively centered on Eric Zemmer’s candidacy for the presidency. Republic “.

There is no proportional interference in freedom of expression

Is it an attack on the freedom of expression protected by the European Convention on Human Rights? “ The position of the writers and their successors only translates to the desire to restrict all freedom of expression in political matters. “Advanced Eric Jemmore.

The argument does not weigh. The court, after balancing the interests, “ The use of plaintiffs’ copyright protection is, in the context of the case, a proportional and necessary interference with Eric Zemor’s freedom of expression. “.

Results: “ His speech, taken from the films “In the House”, “Jean D’Arc”, “A Monkey in the Winter”, “The Quay of the Fox” and “Portrait of Louis Pasteur, the Visionary Viewer” and their distribution on the Internet, without authorization, Creates copyright infringement actions “.

The same court recognized the violation of the moral rights of teachers and their heirs. “ Excerpts used with a politician’s candidacy speech “. A” When distracted from the primary purpose of entertaining or informing, audiovisual works are used for political purposes, without recognition. “.

Eric Jemmore and Society Reconciled! See for yourself “ Order to stop broadcasting version of the video entitled “I am a Candidate for Presidential Election”. “Legal. A fine of 1,500 euros a day for a delay at the end of the 7-day period following the announcement of the decision.” Current penalty for a period of 4 months “.

Each beneficiary is ordered to pay 5,000 euros in compensation and accept the costs.