Mio and Others

Provisional text OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERALSZPUNARdelivered on 8 May 2025 (1)Joined Cases C‑580/23 and C‑795/23 Mio AB,Mio e-handel AB,Mio Försäljning ABv Galleri Mikael & Thomas Asplund Aktiebolag(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt Patent- och marknadsöverdomstolen (Svea Court of Appeal, Patent and Commercial Court of Appeal, Stockholm, Sweden))andkonektra Gmb H,LNv USM U. Schärer Söhne AG(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice, Germany))( Reference for a preliminary hearing – Copyright and related rights – Directive 2001/29/EC – Article 2 – Reproduction right – Concept of a ‘work’ – Copyright protection of works of applied art – Examination of the originality of a work of applied art – Concept of ‘free and creative choices’ – Criteria for the assessment of free and creative choices – Assessment of the infringement of exclusive rights ) Introduction 1.        Two recent decisions from the courts of two Member States, concerning iconic subject matter in the world of design, are a good illustration of the dilemmas relating to the issue raised in the present joined cases, namely the protection by copyright of works of applied art. First, the tribunal judiciaire de Paris (Court of Paris, France) recognised the ‘Kelly’ and the ‘Birkin’, two handbag models from the brand Hermès, as a ‘work’, within the meaning of copyright law. (2) A few days later, the Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice, Germany, one of...