Protection of TV formats

Résumé du document

In today's media environment, TV shows have become a real business, each of them meaning a great amount of money and popularity as long as they can provide new, original and attractive concepts. Therefore, when it comes to plagiarism, the issue of protection of these programs has gained importance. The most successful TV shows are usually the ones which are able to offer different approaches for entertainment, and subsequently, new formats, which come to play an essential role. For example, 'The Weakest Link', 'Who Wants to be a Millionaire?', 'Big Brother' or 'Pop Idol' have all developed a specific format which has been determinant for their success. For obvious reasons, the developers of new TV formats seek for an effective legal protection of their works in order to safeguard themselves from exploitation. However, this legal protection is not guaranteed, and the debate as to whether or not a format can be adequately protected rages on. To what extent can the formats of such programmes be protected and how can such a protection be licensed? The purpose of this paper will be to consider the different legal tools and issues of the protection of TV formats. It will first examine the general criteria of protection under the French law, with regard to its implementation to TV formats; then, it will give a broad consideration of the difficulties of protecting TV formats through the analysis of various cases around the world.

Extraits

[...] This decision proves that although there is still no developed copyright protection of TV formats, some forms of legal actions render possible to protect this content. The second possibility in order to protect TV formats without being able to appeal for copyright protection of it as such; it is possible to protect by copyright the elements which characterise it. Therefore, if an innovative idea is conceived, its application to a TV show must be registered. This precaution prevents other competitors from copying what seems to be the characteristic of a TV programme. [...]

[...] The notion of “form of expression” goes further. It refers to the way in which the work is communicated to the public, ad the article cited above does not allot any importance to it. Indeed, a work should not be more likely to be protected because it was fixed on a written form of expression. The quality, or of the work, as indicates the law of March is neither a criterion for protection, its futility cannot be argued as an opposition to its protection. [...]

[...] We will now focus on other countries by choosing certain case studies in order to have a broader view of the question of the protection of TV formats. Indeed, in order to apply the copyright protection principles to TV formats, these need to be considered as creations, and no longer as ideas, which is the case in the UK. Nevertheless, even under such regulations, some alternative means of protecting TV formats exist. We will end by having a look at those courts which have recognized the necessity of protecting them from plagiarism. II. [...]

[...] The two cases presented above are proof that there is a common trend concerning the protection of TV formats by copyright. Both decisions exposed give a relatively precise definition of format, which is an essential step towards its protection. To conclude, there has been a certain vision of TV formats for a long time, which consists of considering them as mere ideas, as opposed to creative works. Some have said that otherwise, copyrights on TV formats would let the bigger media actors grab the monopoly of the programming, by using copyrights on all their ideas, and that this would destroy the smaller players. [...]

[...] The concept of a TV programme can thus be considered as a work of the mind, insofar as it is derived from an idea which was put into a certain format and is therefore individualized. What is more, the Article 112-1 of the Intellectual Property Code states that provisions of this law shall protect the rights of authors in all works of the mind, regardless of their kid, form of expression, merit or purpose”. This very large consideration could perfectly include TV formats. This article makes clear the fact that no specific kind of work should benefit from a protection only because of its kind. [...]