To quote the professor: “I was inspired to write addendum no. 12, entitled ‘Shoes in copyright law,’ by a shoe from a salt mine displayed in the office of my friend, who is also known for his excellent photo albums. Descriptions of the lawsuits concerning shoes and sandals were a pretext for a few somewhat trivial comments.” Firstly, it can be observed that in cases concerning consumer goods, the plaintiff, as a precaution, raises all theoretically possible grounds for protection, usually including the allegation of copyright infringement, regardless of the real chances of it being upheld. Secondly, disputes concerning industrial designs clearly show how vague the criteria for the characteristics of a work are and how intuitive their application is. Moreover, in EU countries, despite formally common rules for determining the existence of a work, there are fundamental differences in the “severity” of assessments as to whether a given product already meets the required degree of creativity. Thirdly, it seems that in the case of industrial designs, allowing their cumulative protection under the provisions on works, trademarks, and industrial designs often leads to abuse of the copyright protection function—which is particularly long and restrictive, as it is geared towards a different type of creativity and other interests deserving of protection. Link to the article: https://www.prawo.pl/biznes/prawo-autorskie-i-wzory-przemyslowe-prof-markiewicz-o-butach,536378.html
