AUTHORIZATION IN THE POLISH PRESS LAW
Keywords:authorization, the right to the paternity of a work, press law, copyright law, statement made to the press
Since 1984, there have been regulations in the Polish press law under which the publication of verbatim statements of a person provided to the press depends on the consent of the person who made such a statement (authorization). These statements may have a creative nature on many occasions which is subject to the regimen of copyright.
The scientific purpose of the article focuses on the problem of the influence of regulations on authorization adopted in 2007 on the right to the paternity of a work. The author regards as creativity, under certain conditions, not only a press article but also original statements made to the press. Thus, the specified problem concerns the borderline area between the press law and the copyright.
An analysis of regulations which were in force until 2007, including an analysis of the legal status of statements that are subject to authorization and analysis of changes introduced to the authorization law in 2007 together with analysis of the legal status of statements subject to authorization will be used to solve the problem. The author indicates, moreover, circumstances which must be present for a statement made to the press to be regarded as a work protected by copyright and discusses the right to the paternity of the work in the context of statements made to the press. The author uses the dogmatic and legal historical method and the method of case law analysis.
In the author’s opinion, the introduced changes consolidate the copyright of the person making a statement to the press and if they use the rights to authorization they are entitled to.
Authorization also exists in other legal systems in Europe e.g. in the German and French systems. “In each of them, as writes J. Taczkowska, Chapter 1 Legal status of authorization, (in:) Autoryzacja wypowiedzi, Oficyna, available online: https://sip.lex.pl/#/monograph/369164716/3, [accessed on: 2018-04-19] the institution of authorization protects various goods and is based on legal standards resulting from different legislative acts. These standards, however, are always aimed at guaranteeing a balance of forces between the press and the individual”.
M. Brzozowska-Pasieka, Art. 14 (in:) Prawo prasowe. Komentarz praktyczny, Wydawnictwo Prawnicze LexisNexis, available online: https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587603995/401435, [accessed on: 2018-04-18].
E. Ferenc-Szydełko, Art. 14 (in:) Prawo prasowe. Komentarz, LEX, available online: https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587237030/150963, [accessed on: 2018-04-18].
See Art. 28 of the Act on Copyright and Related Rights of 4.02.1994, Journal of Laws 1994, No. 24, item 83 as amended.
Act on Copyright and Related Rights of 4.02.1994, Journal of Laws 1994, No. 24, item 83 as amended.
R. M. Sarbiński, Komentarz do art. 1 ustawy – Prawo autorskie i prawo pokrewne, (in:) R. M. Skarbiński (ed.), M. Siciarek (ed.) Prawo autorskie. Komentarz do wybranych przepisów, LexisNexis 2014, available online: www.lex.pl [accessed on: 2017- 06-27].
In the doctrine, also a condition derived on the basis of Art. 1 of the Act on Copyright and Related Rights, can be met which is necessary for creativeness – human activity. W. Machała, Utwór, jako przedmiot prawa autorskiego, Warszawa 2013, CH Beck, p.121.
K. Grzybczyk, Art. 1, (in:) P. Ślęzak, Ustawa o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych. Komentarz, Warszawa 2017, p. 7.
Decision of the Court of Appeal in Poznań of 7 November 2007, I ACa 800/07, LEX no. 370747.
Decision of the Supreme Court of 25 January 2006, I CK 281/05, LEX no. 181263.
Decision of the Supreme Court of 22 June 2010, IV CSK 359/09, LEX no. 694269.
J. Barta, R. Markiewicz, Komentarz do art. 1 ustawy – Prawo autorskie i prawa pokrewne, thesis number 5 (in:) J. Barta (ed.), R. Markiewicz (ed.), Ustawa o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych. Komentarz, LEX 2011, available online: www.lex.pl, [accessed on 2017-06-27].
Ibidem, thesis number 12.
Ibidem, thesis number 10, R.M. Skarbiński, Komentarz do art. 1 ustawy – Prawo autorskie i prawo pokrewne, op. cit., thesis number 22.
Decision of the Supreme Court of 6 March 2014, V CSK 202/13, LEX no. 1486990.
R. M. Skarbiński, Komentarz do art. 1 ustawy – Prawo autorskie i prawo pokrewne, thesis number 72.
Ibidem, thesis number 72.
Ibidem, thesis number 74.
Decision of the Supreme Court of 21 March 2014, IV CSK 407/13, OSNC 2015, No. 3, item 36.
Thus, the doctrine states that the existence of a bond between the author and their work is objective in nature. See A. Szpunar, Zadośćuczynienie za szkodę niemajątkową, Bydgoszcz 1999, p. 121.
The Act of 11 April 1990 on repealing the act on control of publications and showings, the abolition of control authorities and on the amendment of the Act – Press Law, Journal of Laws 1990, No. 29, item 173.
The Act of 5 August 2010 on protection of undisclosed information, Journal of Laws 2010, No. 182, item 1128.
The Act of 26 January 1884 Press Law, Journal of Laws 1984, No. 5, item 24 as amended until the change introduced by the Act of 10.01. 2013 on the amendment of the Press Law Act, Journal of Laws 2013, No. 771.
Translation of Polish Press Law Act, Available from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/319872633_Translation _of_Polish_Press_Law_Act [accessed on: 2018-04-18].
W. Machała, Autoryzacja – ograniczenie czy gwarancja wolności słowa? Palestra, 2006, No. 7-8. p. 110.
E. Ferenc-Szydełko, Art. 14. (in:) Prawo prasowe. Komentarz, LEX, available online: https://sip.lex.pl/#/commentary/587237030/150963 [accessed on: 19/04/2018].
T. Torańska, O autoryzacji z perspektywy dziennikarza, Materiały pokonferencyjne:
Autoryzacja wypowiedzi w Prawie prasowym – wyrok Trybunału Konstytcyjnego i co dalej? Available on: http://www.hfhrpol.waw.pl/obserwatorium/images/publikacja/Publikacja_1_referaty.pdf [accessed on: 14 August 2018].
Judgement of the ECHR of 5.07.2011 r. on the case of Wizerkaniuk against Poland, complaint no. 18990/05.