Omladinskih brigada 102A, 11070 Belgrade

Copyright Law in Serbia

Author’s subjective rights – the concept, protection and exercising

The concept of work of authorship

Copyright is part of intellectual property law, the branch of law that studies the protection and the exercise of copyright and so-called related rights. Copyright and related rights are regulated by The Law on Copyright and Related Rights, which defines what is considered a work of authorship, who is the author, types of authorizations, as well as situations in which some of the rights are suspended.

Republic of Serbia’s law belongs to continental legal systems and was modeled on German and French civil law. The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works was enacted in 1886 and was the basis of copyright harmonization at the international level. The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia committed itself, by signing The Berne Convention, to harmonize copyright regulation with this international act. It should be noted that The Berne Convention allows national legislation to define details according to their legal traditions and in the spirit of this international agreement.

In addition to The Berne Convention, other conventions, such as those signed in Geneva and Paris, form the basis of continental copyright regulation. There are also a number of international acts regarding the establishment and functioning of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Also, the European Union has adopted numerous copyright directives in order to harmonize copyright legislation at the international level, as well as to adapt it to the high-tech revolution we are part of.

To be able to understand copyright as a branch of law, with all of its rights and obligations, it is necessary to understand the definition of a work of authorship and to break it down in order to analyze all of its elements.

According to its official definition, the work of authorship is an author’s original intellectual creation, expressed in a certain form, regardless of its artistic, scientific or some other value, its purpose, size, contents and way of manifestation, as well as permissibility of public communication of its contents. [1]

We can immediately notice that work of authorship has to be original, has to stand out among everything that already exists. In that regard, “A work of authorship is not original if it is the result of emulation or imitation of already existing works, without any specific and individual intellectual touch which differentiates it from other works.” [2] To determine if some work is original or not, it is not only the number and quantity of elements taken from an existing work that matter (e.g. number of characters or words), but also other elements of both works, such as the nature of characters, names, etc. When it comes to films, composition, colors and scenography must also be taken into account.

A photograph that primarily highlights the author’s artistic personality is the author’s original intellectual creation and is a work of authorship. [3]

The level of originality required for a work to be protected as a work of authorship is assessed in each particular case. In case of dispute, the level of originality is freely assessed by the judge, also on the basis of the evidence provided by the parties. If the court does not have sufficient expertise to evaluate the level of originality, the parties can file a motion for an expert opinion and let a qualified expert determine whether the work is original.

The second important element of the definition is form. To be protected as a work of authorship, a work has to be expressed in a certain form, which does not have to be physical: it can be electronic, or take the form of spoken words or movements.

The third important element of the definition is the connection between the work and its author. A work of authorship can be created only by a natural person, as the result of that person’s intellectual work. Accordingly, a legal person that ordered the creation of work of authorship is not its author. An author is also considered to be a person whose name, pseudonym or sign is indicated on the copies of the work or stated when the work is published, unless proven otherwise. Thus, in order to achieve copyright protection, an author does not have to use his personal name, but he can decide to mark the work of authorship with a pseudonym or decide not to mark it. Therefore, we can conclude that not marking a work of authorship with the author’s name does not affect his authorship, but it is certainly preferable to mark the work of authorship in order to prevent or reduce the possibility of illegal authorship takeover, especially when it comes to works that are not widely known, for which it is not possible to clearly and definitely determine which author they belong to. [4]

The law lists several common forms in which a work of authorship can be expressed, but does not limit it to those forms only, so that a work of authorship can be anything that falls under its legal definition. Accordingly, the following shall be considered work of authorship in particular:

  • Written works (e.g. books, brochures, articles, translations, computer programs in any form of their expression, including their preparatory design material and other);
  • Spoken works (lectures, speeches, orations, etc.);
  • Dramatic, dramatic-musical, choreographic and pantomime works, as well as works originating from folklore;
  • Works of music, with or without words;
  • Films (cinema and television);
  • Fine art works (paintings, drawings, sketches, graphics, sculptures, etc.);
  • Works of architecture, applied art and industrial design;
  • Cartographic works (geographic and topographic maps);
  • Drawings, sketches, models and photographs;
  • The direction of a theatre play;
  • A collection of the works of authorship (an encyclopedia, collection of works, anthology, selected works, music collection, photograph collection, graphic portfolio, exhibition and the like);
  • A collection of folk literary and artistic creations;
  • A collection of documents, court decisions and similar materials.
  • Database, regardless of its form, which in view of the selection and arrangement of its integral parts, meets the requirements to be considered work of authorship.

It is important to note that the protection of a collection of works of authorship in no way restricts the author’s rights to works of authorship that are integral parts of the collection.

An unfinished work, which meets the requirements regarding originality and form, shall be considered work of authorship.

The protection of copyright shall not apply to general ideas, procedures and methods of operations or mathematical concepts, as well as concepts, principles and instructions included in a work of authorship.

The following shall not be considered a work of authorship:

  • Laws, decrees and other regulations;
  • Official materials of state bodies and bodies performing public functions;
  • Official translations of regulations and official materials of state bodies and bodies performing public functions;
  • Submissions and other documents presented in the administrative or court proceedings.

The types of author’s subjective rights

Author’s rights can be divided into author’s moral rights and author’s pecuniary rights, according to the criteria of the type and nature of the powers they assign to their holders.

Author’s moral rights belong to author and are related to his personality. Author’s pecuniary rights also belong to the author, but also to the other holders to whom those rights have been licensed by the author or holders who have acquired those rights on the basis of law.

This division also determines the transferability, duration and other important characteristics of each of these rights.

Author’s moral rights

There are several types of author’s moral rights:

  • Right of Authorship – the author has the exclusive right to be recognized as the author of his work;
  • Right to be Named;
  • Right of Disclosure – the author has the exclusive right to decide whether his work will be disclosed and to set the way in which it will be disclosed. Also, until disclosure of the work, the author has the exclusive right to inform the public about the content of the work or to describe it (before a film’s premiere, the author has the exclusive right to provide information about the film and to publish excerpts and trailers);
  • Right of Protection of the Work’s Integrity – the author has the exclusive right to protect the integrity of his work, especially to oppose changes to his work made by unauthorized persons, to oppose public communication of his work in modified or incomplete form, taking into account the specific form of public communication and good business practice, and also to give permission for modification of his work. One of the most common violations of author’s moral rights committed by the media is a violation of the integrity of the work – specifically photographs. Cropping, writing text over photos or changing the color tone, contrast or brightness of the photo is not allowed without the author’s permission. The second most common violation is failing to state the author’s name when publicly communicating the work [5];
  • Right to Oppose Unbecoming Exploitation of the Work – the author has the exclusive right to oppose exploitation of his work in a way that endangers or may endanger his reputation.

Author’s moral rights are not transferable and belong to the author only. Author’s moral rights are strictly related to author’s personality and therefore cannot be traded. It is not possible to conclude a contract whose subject is the transfer of authorship of a work. However, it is possible to transfer author’s pecuniary rights by contract.

When publicly communicating someone else’s work of authorship, it is not enough to state only the name of the source, i.e. the media outlet holding the author’s pecuniary rights; the name of the author of the text or photographs must also be indicated. Even if the initial source did not state the name of the author, failure to indicate his name alongside communicated content is considered a violation of author’s moral rights.

Therefore, the moral rights of the author of a photograph are violated by unauthorized public communication of the photograph without indicating author’s name or pseudonym, and without author’s permission for public communication, as well as by public communication of the photograph in a modified form.[6]

Author’s pecuniary rights

There are several types of author’s pecuniary rights:

  • Right to Reproduce;
  • The Right to Place in Circulation Copies of the Work;
  • The Right to Rent Copies of the Work;
  • The Right to Perform;
  • The Right to Present;
  • The Right to Broadcast;
  • The Right of Re-Broadcasting;
  • The Right to Broadcast by Satellite;
  • The Right of Cable Re-Broadcasting;
  • The Right to Public Communication, including the Interactive Communication of the Work to the Public;
  • The Right to Adapt, Arrange or Alter the Work in Some Other Manner;
  • The Right to Communicate a Work from a Sound or Picture Carrier to the Public;
  • Right of Access to a Copy of the Work;
  • Droit de Suite;
  • Right to Prohibit the Exhibition of the Original Copy of a Work of Fine Art;
  • Author’s Priority Right of Modification of a Work of Architecture;
  • Author’s Right to Special Remuneration;
  • Right of the author to remuneration in the case of lending.

Unlike author’s moral rights, author’s pecuniary rights are transferable and author can license them to another natural or legal person for permanent or temporary use, with or without compensation. The holder of author’s pecuniary rights can therefore be the author himself, his successor or another person to whom the author has licensed his pecuniary rights.

Author’s moral rights are indefinite, while author’s pecuniary rights are limited in time by law.

Author’s pecuniary rights can belong to authors, but unlike author’s moral rights, can also belong to other persons to whom the author has licensed them, or to whom a subsequent holder of author’s pecuniary rights has further ceded them.

Besides transfer, the holder may acquire author’s pecuniary rights on another basis. For example, an employer can acquire author’s pecuniary rights to works created by its employee in the course of employment, for a period of five years from the completion of the work. [7]

Transfer of author’s pecuniary rights

Author’s pecuniary rights are transferable by inheritance, as well as by contract.

There are several types of contracts that have author’s pecuniary rights as their subject. The type of contract depends on the type of rights that are licensed or ceded, and on whether the work of authorship already exists or is yet to be created. The licensing of author’s pecuniary rights may be either exclusive or non-exclusive, depending on the scope of the powers transferred to licensee, as well as on the effects of the transfer on the third parties.

Difference between the licensing and the ceding

Licensing is the so-called constitutive form of transfer, in which the original authorizations remain with their original holder (author or heir), while the agreement (contract) constitutes a new authorization, and therefore creates new right which is licensed to licensee. That newly constituted authorization needs to be determined by the contract in terms of content, territory and time, which means contract needs to precisely define the limits of licensed authority. [8]

The ceding of author’s pecuniary rights is a translative form of transfer, where the authorizations that are the subject of transfer are transferred by cession from one person to another. Unlike in the case of the licensing, in this case transferor ceases to be the holder of authorizations which are subject of the ceding. In Republic of Serbia’s law system, the ceding of author’s pecuniary rights is allowed only to those who have already acquired author’s pecuniary rights by licensing. The authors, as well as their successors, are authorized to transfer only newly-constituted authorizations by licensing. In case of the licensing, the transferor remains in possession of the initial authorizations which are only licensed to licensee. In case of the ceding, a person to whom authorizations have already been transferred by contract may further cede those authorizations to a third party, but by doing so the transferor no longer holds them. [9]

Also, by non-exclusive licensing of author’s pecuniary rights, the author retains the right to allow another person to modify his work of authorship, regardless of the licensee. [10]

Exclusive and non-exclusive licensing

When certain authorization is licensed in exclusive manner, it means that the licensee is authorized to use the protected work with effect towards third parties. In addition to the right to actively use and exploit the work of authorship, the licensee also has the authority to prohibit third parties from performing mentioned actions, as well as to use all legal means in order to exercise and protect his rights.

For example, if a certain person is the author of a text that has the character of a work of authorship, that text can be licensed to a media publisher. If the licence is exclusive, the author cannot license it again to third parties or use it himself. If the licence is non-exclusive, the author remains holder of author’s pecuniary rights and is authorized to use that work of authorship himself or to license it again.

The author and his successor can only transfer author’s pecuniary rights by license, not by cession. But, when it comes to persons who have acquired some authorizations from author or his successor by licensing, they can further license them to third parties, and they can also cede them.

Transfer of author’s pecuniary rights can be done by inheritance or by legal transaction, i.e. by contract.

Inheritance

After the death of the author, author’s pecuniary rights are transferred to his successors and those rights last 70 years from the moment of the author’s death.

Author’s moral rights are not transferable, but successors, as well as cultural institutions, are given the right to take care of author’s moral rights, which are not limited in terms of time. Taking care of author’s moral rights implies exercising author’s moral rights in order to protect the integrity of the work of authorship and the legitimate interests of the author. For example, cultural institutions should not allow work of famous author or his character to be used in inappropriate way or to promote inappropriate products. Also, according to court practice, after the death of the author, his successors, as natural guardians of the memory and moral interests of the deceased author, exercise his moral rights and inherit his pecuniary rights. Author’s successors may exercise the author’s moral rights, except the Right of Disclosure, if the author has prohibited it, and the right to modify the work of authorship. The protection of author’s moral rights regarding authorship, integrity of the work, as well as Right to Oppose Unbecoming Exploitation of the Work, can be exercised by author’s successors, associations of authors, as well as by art or scientific institutions. Furthermore, successors are authorized to oppose distortion and exploitation of the work in a manner that poses a threat to the author’s honour or reputation, and that arises from author’s Right of Protection of the Work’s Integrity.[11]

Contract

The holder of author’s pecuniary rights may license or cede those rights to another person by contract.

Only the author and his successor can license author’s pecuniary rights, while a person to whom the author’s pecuniary rights have already been transferred by contract may further cede those rights to others.

Depending on whether the licensee acquires the right to use the work to the exclusion of all others, including the author, the licensing may be exclusive or non-exclusive.

In case of exclusive licensing, no one, not even the author or his successor, is authorized to exploit the work of authorship in the agreed time period and in the agreed territory. Also, it is possible to exclusively transfer author’s pecuniary rights to more than one person, if their rights do not interfere with each other. In the case of a non-exclusive transfer, the transferee receives only precisely defined author’s pecuniary rights, which are stated in contract.

Copyright Contract

A Copyright Contract is a legal transaction by which author’s pecuniary rights are licensed or ceded, partially or in whole.

Copyright Contract shall be made in writing.

In accordance with the law, a Copyright Contract that is not concluded in writing may be validated (convalidation) if it is fully performed by one of the contracting parties. In that situation, Copyright Contract will produce legal effects regardless of the fact that it has not fulfilled the requirements regarding form. In that case, the provisions of the Law on Contracts and Torts relating to the contract for work shall apply. [12]

Also, when it comes to Publishing Contract concluded in writing, but signed by only one of the contracting parties, according to court practice, it will produce legal effects if it is fully executed, i.e. if the contracting parties have fully or mostly performed obligations arising from contract. [13]

The law provides an exception from the obligatory written form for contracts regarding the publication of articles, drawings and other author’s contributions in newspapers and periodicals. In that case Publishing Contract does not have to be concluded in writing. [14]

Special provisions in favor of the authors

If the profit made by exploiting a work of authorship is evidently disproportionate to the contractual remuneration, the author or his successor shall have the right to request the contract to be modified for the purpose of eliminating such disproportion. Also, if the author’s remuneration is not agreed upon and if the profit made by the use of the work of authorship exceeds costs of its use thereby allowing the payment of author’s remuneration, the author or his successor shall have the right to request that the contract be modified to include such remuneration.

In contracts concluded in writing, especially standard form contracts, any ambiguities in the text of the contract will be interpreted to the detriment of the party who drew up the contract. [15]

Essential constitutive elements of Copyright Contract

Every Copyright Contract must contain:

  • names of contracting parties;
  • title and/or identification of the work of authorship;
  • rights that are the subject-matter of licensing or cession;
  • amount of remuneration if any, and the method and terms for its payment;
  • limitations related to content, territory and time, if any.

The work of authorship to which the rights relate must be identified in the contract, i.e. it must be determined or determinable. It can be an already existing work, but also a future one, whose creation is commissioned by the contract.

Exercise of copyright

Every copyright holder may exercise his rights either individually or collectively, through organizations licensed by the Intellectual Property Office. Individual exercise is the most comprehensive form of protection, offering authors the widest range of claims where it is feasible and expedient.

Exercise of copyright through organizations for collective exercise of copyright

This solution is especially relevant in the market of musical works of authorship, because otherwise, for each broadcast of an average musical work on radio or similar medium, it would be necessary to obtain numerous permissions and to agree on compensation. Therefore, this way of exercising rights, as a type of statutory license, has come to life at international level as the most adequate solution. Holders of author’s pecuniary rights conclude contracts with relevant organizations, which authorize those organizations to collect a sum of money on holder’s behalf, as a compensation for the content broadcasting. Those organizations then distribute the collected fees to the authors or holders through their organizational structures, in accordance with how often the works to which they hold rights are broadcast.

In the Republic of Serbia, there are currently eight organizations that have a license for collective exercise of copyright and related rights:

    • “Organizacija muzičkih autora Srbije – SOKOJ” (Organization of music authors of Serbia);
    • “Organizacija proizvođača fonograma Srbije – OFPS” (Organization of phonogram producers of Serbia);
    • “Organizacija za kolektivno ostvarivanje prava interpretatora – PI” (Organization for the collective exercise of the rights of performers);
    • “Organizacija fotografskih autora – OFA” (Organization of photographic authors);
    • “Organizacija za ostvarivanje repografskih prava – OORP” (Organization for exercising repographic rights);
    • “Organizacija filmskih autora Srbije – UFUS AFA ZAŠTITA” (Organization of film authors of Serbia);
    • “Glumačka organizacija Srbije – GOS” (Actors’ Organization of Serbia);
    • “Asocijacija autora – Organizacija stvaralaca likovnih dela – AA” (Authors’ Association – Organization of Visual Artists).
 
 

Individual exercise of copyright

Types of requests

If the author or holder of author’s pecuniary rights decides to exercise and protect his copyright through court, he can file different types of requests.

Under the Law on Copyright and Related Rights, the claims available in court include, in particular:

  • a claim for a declaration that the right has been infringed;
  • a claim to stop the infringement and to prohibit further infringement of the same kind;
  • a claim for the destruction or modification of infringing copies and of the means used to make them;
  • a claim for compensation for material and non-material damage;
  • a claim for publication of the judgment at the defendant’s expense;
  • a claim for information on third parties involved in the infringement.

Before or during the proceedings, the court may also order provisional measures to preserve evidence or to stop the infringement immediately.

If your work has been used without permission, or without your name, see our Copyright Protection in Serbia service.

Damage compensation

Author or holder of author’s pecuniary rights has a right to compensation for material damages and that is one of the most commonly filed claims. Compensation for material damage is reflected in diminution of someone’s property. The amount of compensation for material damage is usually determined by market value of commercial exploiting of work of authorship. If that market value cannot be proven by contract or other proof of the market value, it is necessary to find an expert or institution which will give a professional opinion of the market value. If there are no objective parameters, determining material damage is often a challenge. For example, the market value of commercially exploited photographs is determined according to the tariff of the „ULUPUDS“ association.[17] Court usually finds that mentioned tariff is competent to determine market value of photographs, especially photographs taken by professional photographers. [18]

The tariff of the „ULUPUDS“ association is a standard for determining the compensation for illegal use of the work of authorship. That tariff also represents guideline for determining author’s remuneration, but the author can also set a different amount of remuneration at his own discretion. [19] Besides compensation for material damage, the author, as a natural person, is also entitled to a compensation for non-material damage due to psychological pain suffered by violation of his moral rights. Compensation for non-material damage consists of awarding a sum of money to the author as a form of satisfaction, which he may use to obtain some satisfaction in return for the psychological pain suffered. The amount of compensation for non-material damage due to violation of author’s moral rights is assessed in each specific case, and there is no tariff by which it could be precisely determined on the basis of objective parameters. However, the decisions made by court usually move within informally determined limits.

Author’s moral rights represent personal connection between author and his work of authorship, so the consequences caused by violation of author’s moral rights are manifested through psychological pain suffered by author due to diminished reputation, honour or personality. Compensation for non-material damage can be awarded only if the author has suffered psychological pain due to violation of author’s moral rights in accordance with Article 200 of The Law on Contracts and Torts, while applicability of The Law on Copyright and Related Rights is limited only to determination of the infringement of an author’s moral right. [20]

Also, in order for a claim for compensation for non-material damage due to violation of author’s moral rights to be founded, it is not enough just to determine the infringement, but also to prove that the damage really occurred, as well as to prove there is a causal link between the infringement and the psychological pain. [21]

The fact that the defendant has violated the plaintiff’s moral rights does not necessarily mean that the plaintiff suffered non-material damage. The plaintiff has to prove that he suffered consequences in form of a psychological pain, as well as to prove a causal link between the infringement of his moral rights and violation of his personal rights as one of the recognized forms of non-material damage. [22]

Non-material and material damage can be claimed independently of each other, as well as in the form of cumulative claims. If the court, considering all circumstances, especially intensity and duration of the pain, evaluates that there is non-material damage, court will award fair money compensation for suffered psychological pain and fear, regardless of compensation for material damage, as well as in its absence. Also, when deciding on a claim for compensation for non-material damage and the amount of it, court will take into account significance of infringement and the purpose of compensation, but also will pay attention not to favor aspirations incompatible with compensation’s nature and social purpose. [23]

When assessing the amount of compensation for non-material damage, in addition to the intensity of the psychological pain suffered, other circumstances are also taken into account. Thus, when making a decision on the amount of fair monetary compensation for non-material damage due to violation of author’s moral rights by publicly communicating photographs without indicating author’s name, as well as by publicly communicating photographs in incomplete form, court will assess whether the plaintiff is a professional photographer, i.e. whether it is important for him to be signed as the author of photographs, as well as whether it is important for him that his photographs are not modified. [24]

The court will especially assess whether modification of work of authorship affects the value of the photograph itself, whether integrity of work of authorship is highly jeopardized, as well as the fact whether the public communication of photograph was in negative way and without respecting the legitimate interests of the author. [25] In specific cases, the amount of damage compensation may be higher than for usual modifications of a work of authorship. [26]

In Republic of Serbia’s court practice, in most cases, the court will assess the intensity of psychological pain, as well as the appropriate compensation, by taking into account the need for efficiency of the procedure. Otherwise, each individual expertise would prolong litigation, while litigation costs would be fairly high compared to the usual fee compensation awarded. [27] [28]

The authors of the Media Strategy 2020-2025 expressed concerns over the high amounts of compensation fees awarded in copyright disputes on the one hand, but also insufficient protection of works of authorship created by journalists, on the other hand. According to the Media Strategy, awarding high compensation fees to authors and holders of author’s pecuniary rights represents inappropriate pressure on the media. Court practice, high number of disputes concerning photographs, as well as fees in those disputes, on one side, and on the other side, a negligibly low number of copyright disputes concerning other media content, as well as uncontrolled usage of someone else’s media content, has led to the impression that copyright and related rights concerning media activities (such as journalistic texts, videos, etc.) do not enjoy the same degree of protection as photographs. Problems related to copyright disputes are also reflected in the narrow interpretation of copyright limitations for the purpose of satisfying interests in the field of information (daily reporting, parodies, satire, etc.). At the end of Media Strategy, authors conclude that it is necessary to improve the regulations in the field of the protection of copyright related to journalistic content. [29]

The fact is that disputes regarding copyright on texts written by journalists, are not widely represented in Republic of Serbia, but we cannot say that copyright regulation is the only issue. Insufficiently developed awareness of journalists about which content meets the requirements to be considered the work of authorship, as well as lack of desire to individually exercise their rights through courts, have left little opportunity for court practice to develop. Part of the problem is fact that judges often do not have enough knowledge and experience to freely determine whether a particular journalistic report is a work of authorship or just a regular report on ongoing events. Also, the parameters for the calculation of the material damage compensation are not settled, so in many proceedings there is a need for expertise to determine if such report is work of authorship or not, and then to determine the amount of appropriate compensation. Tariffs of the journalist and media associations are not established as the standards in court practice, because disputes initiated by journalists to protect their texts are not so common. A tariff issued by Independent Association of Journalists of Serbia (Nezavisno udruženje novinara Srbije) is usually used to determine fees for using journalistic texts.[30]

On the other hand, when it comes to photographs, this problem is solved, first of all thanks to the nature and characteristics of photography as a work of authorship, where it is relatively easy to determine its authenticity and authorship, but also thanks to the official tariff issued by professional association “ULUPUDS“. That official tariff enabled professional photographers, regardless of the fact whether they are or are not members of that association, to have clear parameters for calculating material damage which are accepted by courts. Mentioned tariff is widely accepted by courts. Even the amendments of the tariff from year 2017, which brought a significant fee increase, are also accepted by courts as relevant values. [31] There is also an Opinion of the Media Association [32], which exists side by side with “ULUPUDS“’s official tariff, by which that professional association has determined their own prices for the use of photographs in the media, and those prices are significantly lower than the prices determined by “ULUPUDS“. However, the use of this Opinion has never really come to life in court practice and the courts mainly use the tariff of the photographic association. The tariff was last updated on 27 June 2023, and the current version applies to the use of photographs from that date. [33]

Disclaimer: The information provided on this page is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion. While we make reasonable efforts to ensure that the information is accurate and up to date, laws, regulations, their interpretation and judicial practice may change. The application of copyright law depends on the specific circumstances of each case. Readers are advised to seek professional legal advice before making any legal or business decisions.

Footnotes

[1] The Law on Copyright and Related Rights, Article 2

[2] The Ruling of the Supreme Court of Cassation, Rev. 405/2013, of 15 May 2014.

[3] From the Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Gž 181/2016, of 28th of October 2016, from the statement of reasons: „The plaintiff, as photo reporter, went to the factory “Z” with the intention to take a photograph, and he took photograph “l.p.” which has a clearly defined theme. While taking the photo, the plaintiff was trying to express his artistic personality by searching for the best situation and by setting the camera.”

[4] The unambiguous belonging of work of authorship to an author is determined on the basis of its general recognizability. For example, the court will not determine whether Ivo Andrić wrote the novel “The Bridge on the Drina”, or whether the painter Marko Murat painted “The Arrival of Emperor Dušan to Dubrovnik”. These are indisputable facts.

[5] The Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Gž 161/2017, of 9th of February 2018: Given the legal nature and effect of copyright, the author’s exclusive authority is to modify his work, and his moral rights are not subject to revocation or restriction. From the statement of reasons: It should be pointed out that the defendant could not make the mentioned changes without the approval of the plaintiff, even if the ministry or another body or legal entity explicitly requests it, bearing in mind that copyright is absolute right by its nature and acts erga omnes.

[6] The Ruling of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Gž 7960/2013 of 29 January 2014

[7] The Judgment of the Higher Court in Belgrade, P4 235/17, from the statement of reasons: „Deciding about active legitimization objection, the court found that it was unfounded, bearing in mind that five years passed since the creation and first publication of the photograph in 2008 and after that deadline, only the author is authorized to dispose of the photograph, as well as to request copyright protection, in case of infringement.“

[8] S.Marković, D.Popović, Intellectual Property Law, 2017, page 212

[9] Ibid. 215

[10] The Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Gž 87/2016 of 15th of June 2016, from the statement of reasons: In the case of non-exclusive licensing of author’s pecuniary rights, the licensee is not authorized to prohibit others from using the work of authorship, according to Article 60, paragraph 3 of the Law on Copyright and Related Rights. As the plaintiff is the licensee of the author’s pecuniary rights on the disputed musical work of authorship in non-exclusive way, the defendant, as the author, is authorized to allow adaptation, arrangement and other changes on his musical work of authorship “B”.

[11] The Judgment of the Supreme Court of Serbia, Gž 111/05 of 29 December 2005

[12] The Judgment of the Supreme Court of Serbia, Rev. 11941/04 of 14th of July 2004, from the statement of reasons: The fact that the parties have not concluded a written contract in terms of Article 56 of the Law on Copyright, which is why that contract does not produce legal effects, does not prevent the court to determine in terms of Article 3 of the Law on Copyright that slides the plaintiff has recorded present the work of art in the field of photography, i.e. that plaintiff is the author of those slides and that the defendant has violated his copyrights and pecuniary rights because she did not pay him the appropriate remuneration. However, an orally concluded contract also produces legal effects if its content, and rights and obligations arising from it are proven, and in that case the provisions of the Law on Contracts and Torts regarding the contract for work shall apply.

[13] The Ruling of the Supreme Court of Serbia,Gž 8/02 of 18th of April 2002

[14] The Law on Copyright and Related Rights, Article 74

[15] The Supreme Commercial Court of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Sl. 1156/70

[17] ULUPUDS photography section tariff of minimum fees, current version of 27 June 2023 (previous version of 2017: http://www.ulupuds.org.rs/pdf/2017/Cenovnik%20foto%20sekcije%20ULUPUDS-a%202017.pdf)

[18] The Judgment of the Higher Court in Belgrade, P4 165/15 of 15th of July 2016, confirmed by the Judgment of the Court of Appeal Gž4 28/16, from 16/12 D.Popesku, Newsletter of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, no. 9/2017, page 44

[19] The Judgment of the Higher Court in Belgrade, P4 165/15 of 15th of July 2016, confirmed by the Judgment of the Court of Appeal Gž4 28/16, from 16/12 D.Popesku, Newsletter of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, no. 9/2017, page 44

[20] The Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Gž 227/2013 of 16TH of April 2014

[21] Ibid.

[22] Ibid.

[23] The Law on Contracts and Torts

[24] The Judgment of the Court of Appeal in Belgrade, Gž 159/2017 of 19th of October 2018

[25] The Judgment of the Higher Court in Belgrade, P4 119/13

[26] The Judgment of the Higher Court in Belgrade, P4 119/13

[27] The Judgment of the Higher Court in Belgrade, P4 119/13

[28] Civil Procedure Law, Article 232

[29] The Strategy for the development of the public information system in Republic of Serbia 2020-2025

[30] The tariff of journalistic works and services, NUNS, of 17th of March 2018

[31] For example, instead of the previous 40 EUR for publishing a photograph on the internet for a period up to one year, in 2017 the fee was increased to 150 EUR

[32] The opinion of the professional association, Media Association of Serbia, 22nd of July 2016

[33] Under the tariff of 27 June 2023, the fee for publishing a photograph on a web portal or online medium for up to one year is 195 points, where one point equals one euro at the middle exchange rate of the National Bank of Serbia on the date of calculation. For an overview of the current tariff, see: ULUPUDS Price List: Overview of Minimum Photo Prices (in Serbian).