“And alongside these existing procedures, I wondered whether the means of acquisition or of lapsing provided in the Civil Code, which generally apply to tangible things, could, as necessary, apply to these intellectual creations or distinctive signs. Some legal experts have in fact supported this proposition in France. While the results ultimately turn out to be quite meagre, some extensions are no less feasible.” An interesting question, for example, is related to the application of the rules of acquisition of the property through the fact of possession. According to Bernard Vanbrabant, the rule of usucaption (acquisitive prescription) could be applied in some cases of intellectual property: nonetheless, it would have to be assumed that someone had been using and promoting a work for many decades without a genuine successor in title reacting, which is, to an extent, a textbook example.

The third and final part broaches the question of contracts, which are inevitable in intellectual property. The holder of the intellectual property rights, for example, is not always able to honour all the obligations, in particular, payment of the various “taxes” due in the field of patents, or to perform all the acts of exploitation that these rights allow. He must therefore be linked with third parties by concluding one or more contracts. This is the case for the author who works with an editor, or the musician and the production house, or the inventor and the factory for which he works. Not to mention the intermediaries who may take the responsibility for circulating the works, cases of co-ownership, regardless of whether it is in the context of a group creation or pursuant to an inheritance. The list is long and there are as many sources of litigation as there are of possible contracts. Again, it was relevant to check whether the Civil Code could assist in filling certain gaps in this aspect of the matter of intellectual rights and how the rules that it contains should be applied.

In this third and final part, Bernard Vanbrabant pays very close attention to the questions that are raised by the two most common types of contracts in the matter. The assignment contract and the licensing contract where the rights holder may or may not wish to dispose of his rights. This contractual duality seems in effect to concern all intellectual property rights, although many may raise doubts about the relevance of the distinction in the field of copyright. Assignment contracts transfer the rights that no longer belong to the creator because the two parties have signed the contract, while licensing contracts allow the use of creations without the inventor losing his rights.

A great conceptual step forward

The two last parts focus primarily on case law, on intellectual property litigation, whether or not common depending on the questions examined. The author approaches them systematically by relating them to articles in the Civil Code. He attempts to provide solutions, or considerations, by returning to conceptual tools developed in the first part. Depending on litigation and following its possible approximation to movable or immovable property, as an asset, the author establishes the relevance of invoking an article in the law that initially did not consider intellectual property rights. The case-by-case study shows that the method is effective in initiating new more precise legislation. It will act as an example or tool for reflection for all practitioners facing this type of problem.

Needless to say, the author does not answer all questions, even though the work provided is considerable. What appears to be the greatest contribution for the still young and tumultuous world of intellectual property is precisely the rigour and the constancy in the methodological application the author uses to approach each problem after having defined precisely the nature of intellectual property and the rights that cover it.